The Flight of K͟husrau in the Middle of the First Year of my Reign.
Futile[105] ideas had entered the mind of K͟husrau in consequence of his youth and the pride youths have, and the lack of experience and the lack of foresight of worthless companions, especially at the time of my revered father’s illness. Some of these short-sighted ones, through the multitude of their crimes and offences, had become hopeless of pardon and indulgence, and imagined that by making K͟husrau a tool they might conduct the affairs of State through him. They overlooked the truth that acts of sovereignty and world rule are not things to be arranged by the worthless endeavours of defective intellects. The just Creator bestows them on him whom he considers fit for this glorious and exalted duty, and on such a person doth He fit the robe of honour.
“He who is seized of Fortune cannot be deprived of it;
Throne and diadem are not things of purchase;
It is not right to wrest crown and dominion
From the head which God, the Crown-cherisher, has indicated.”
As the futile imaginations of the seditious and short-sighted had no result but disgrace and regret, the affairs of the kingdom were confirmed in the hands of this suppliant at the throne of Allah. I invariably found K͟husrau preoccupied and distracted. However much, in favour and affection for him, I wished to drive from his mind some of his fears and alarms, nothing was gained until, at last, by the advice of those whose fortune was reversed, on the night of Sunday, Ẕī-l-ḥijja 8th, of the year mentioned (April 6th, 1605), when two gharis had passed, he made a pretence[106] of going to visit the tomb of His Majesty (Akbar), and went off with 350 horsemen, who were his adherents, from within the fort of Agra. Shortly after, one of the lamp attendants who was acquainted with the Wazīru-l-mulk gave him the news of K͟husrau’s flight. The Vizier took him to the Amīru-l-umarā, who, as the news seemed true, came in a distracted state of mind to the door of the private apartments and said to one of the eunuchs, “Take in my request and say that I have a necessary representation to make, and let the king honour me by coming out.” As such an affair had not entered my thoughts I supposed that news had come from the Deccan or Gujarat. When I came out and heard what the news was, I asked, “What must be done? Shall I mount myself, or shall I send K͟hurram?” The Amīru-l-umarā submitted that he would go if I ordered it. “Let it be so,” I said. Afterwards he said, “If he will not turn back on my advice, and takes up arms, what must be done?” Then I said, “If he will go in no way on the right road, do not consider a crime anything that results from your action. Kingship regards neither son nor son-in-law. No one is a relation to a king.”
When I had said these words and other things, and had dismissed him, it occurred to me that K͟husrau was very much annoyed with him, and that in consequence of the dignity and nearness (to me) which he (the Amīr) enjoyed, he was an object of envy to his equals and contemporaries.[107] Perhaps they might devise treachery and destroy him. I therefore ordered Muʿizzu-l-mulk to recall him, and selecting in his place S͟haik͟h Farīd Bak͟hs͟hī-begī commanded him to start off at once, and to take with him the mansabdars and ahadis who were on guard. Ihtimām K͟hān the kotwāl was made scout and intelligence officer. I determined, God willing, to start off myself when it was day. Muʿizzu-l-mulk brought back the Amīru-l-umarā.
About this time, Aḥmad Beg K͟hān and Dūst Muḥammad K͟hān had been sent off to Kabul,[108] and had got as far as Sikandra, which was on K͟husrau’s route. On his arrival they came out of their tents with some of their people, and returned and waited on me with the news that K͟husrau had taken the Panjab road and was hastening on. It occurred to me that he might change his route and go somewhere else. As his maternal uncle, Mān Singh, was in Bengal, it occurred to many of the servants of the State that he might go in that direction. I sent out on every side, and ascertained that he was making for the Panjab. Meantime day dawned, and in reliance on the grace and favour of God Almighty, and with clear resolve, I mounted, withheld by nothing and no one.
“In truth, he who is pursued by sorrow.
Knows not how the road is or how he may travel it.
This he knows, that horror drives him on:
He knows not with whom he goes nor whom he leaves behind.”
When I reached the venerable mausoleum of my revered father, which is three kos from the city, I begged for aid to my courage from the spirit of that honoured one. About this time they captured and brought in[109] Mīrzā Ḥasan, son of Mīrzā S͟hāhruk͟h, who had proposed to accompany K͟husrau. He could not deny it when I questioned him, and I ordered them to tie his hands and mount him on an elephant.[110] This was the first good omen manifested through the kindness and blessing of that venerable one. At midday, as it had become exceedingly hot, having rested awhile under the shade of a tree, I said to the K͟hān Aʿz̤am that we, with all our composure, were in such a state that we had not taken till now our regular allowance of opium, which it was the practice to take the first thing in the morning, and no one had reminded us of the omission. We might imagine from this what was now the condition of that graceless one (K͟husrau).[111]
My trouble was this, that my son without any cause or reason should become an opponent and an enemy. If I should make no endeavour to capture him, the fractious or rebellious would have an instrument, or else he would take his own way and go for an asylum to the Ūzbegs or the Persians, and contempt would fall upon my government. On this account, having made a special point of capturing him, I went on after a short rest two or three kos beyond pargana Mathura, which is 20 kos from Agra, and I alighted at one of the villages of that pargana where there is a tank.
When K͟husrau arrived at Mathura, he met Ḥusain Beg Badak͟hs͟hī, who was of those who had received favours from my revered father and was coming from Kabul to wait on me. As it is the temperament of the Badak͟hs͟hīs to be seditious and turbulent, K͟husrau regarded[112] this meeting as a godsend, and made Ḥusain Beg the captain and guide of 200 or 300 Badakhshan Aimāqs, who were with him.
Anyone whom they met, they plundered of horses and goods. Merchants and conveyers of goods were plundered by these rascals, and wheresoever they went men’s wives and children were not safe from the calamity of these wretches. With his own eyes K͟husrau was witnessing the oppression practised in the hereditary dominions of his ancestors, and after being a witness of the improper deeds of these rascals he a thousand times every moment wished death for himself. Finally, he had no remedy but to temporize with and support those dogs. If good luck and fortune had assisted him in his affairs, he would have made repentance and regret his voucher, and come without any deceit to wait on me. God, who knows the world of secrets, knows that I should have passed over his offences entirely and shown him such favour and affection that to the extent of a hair’s point no estrangement or fear would have remained upon his mind. Inasmuch as during the lifetime of the late king (Akbar) an intention of joining in the sedition of some of the rebels had manifested itself in his mind, and he knew that this had come to my knowledge, he placed no reliance on my kindness and affection. His mother, while I was prince, in grief at his ways and behaviour and the misconduct of her brother Mādho Singh,[113] killed herself by swallowing opium (tiryāq).[114] What shall I write of her excellences and goodness? She had perfect intelligence, and her devotion to me was such that she would have sacrificed a thousand sons and brothers for one hair of mine. She constantly wrote to K͟husrau and urged him to be sincere and affectionate to me. When she saw that it was of no use and that it was unknown how far he would be led away, she from the indignation and high spirit which are inherent in the Rajput character determined upon death. Her mind was several times disturbed, for such feelings were hereditary, and her ancestors and her brothers had occasionally showed signs of madness, but after a time had recovered. At a time when I had gone hunting, on Ẕī-l-ḥijja 26th, 1013[115] (May 6th, 1605), she in her agitation swallowed a quantity of opium, and quickly passed away. It was as if she had foreseen this behaviour of her unworthy son.
My first marriage and that at the commencement of my adolescence was with her. After K͟husrau’s birth I gave her the title of S͟hāh Begam. When she could not endure the bad conduct of her son and brother towards me she became disgusted with life and died, thereby escaping the present grief and sorrow. In consequence of her death, from the attachment I had for her, I passed some days without any kind of pleasure in life or existence, and for four days, which amount to 32 watches, I took nothing in the shape of food or drink. When this tale was told to my revered father, a letter of condolence of excessive kindness and affection reached this devoted disciple, and he sent me a robe of honour and the auspicious turban tied just as he had taken it off his head. This favour threw water on the flame of my grief and afforded complete quiet and repose to my unquietude and disturbance. My intention in relating these circumstances is to point out that no evil fortune is greater than when a son, through the impropriety of his conduct and his unapproved methods of behaviour, causes the death of his mother and becomes contumacious and rebellious to his father, without cause or reason, but simply through his own imaginations and futile ideas, and chooses to avoid the blessing of waiting upon him. Inasmuch as the Almighty Avenger lays a proper punishment on each action, of necessity his condition finally came to this, that he was caught under the worst circumstances, and falling from a position of trust became captive to perpetual incarceration.
“When the man of sense behaves as if drunk,
He puts his foot in a snare, his head in a noose.”
To sum up, on Tuesday, Ẕī-l-ḥijja 10th, I alighted at the station of Hoḍal.[116] S͟haik͟h Farīd Bak͟hs͟hī and a band of valiant men were chosen to pursue K͟husrau and became the vanguard of the victorious army. I sent back Dūst Muḥammad, who was in attendance on me, on account of his previous service and his white beard, to take charge of the fort of Agra and of the zanāna and the treasuries. When leaving Agra, I had placed the city in the charge of Iʿtimādu-d-daula and Wazīru-l-mulk. I now said to Dūst Muḥammad, “As we are going to the Panjab, and that province is in the diwani of Iʿtimādu-d-daula, you will despatch him to us, and will imprison and keep watch over the sons[117] of Mīrzā Muḥammad Ḥakīm who are in Agra; as when such proceedings manifest themselves in the son of one’s loins what may one expect from nephews and cousins?” After the dispatch of Dūst Muḥammad, Muʿizzu-l-mulk became bakhshi.
On Wednesday I alighted at Palwal, and on Thursday at Farīdābād; on Friday, the 13th, I reached Delhi. From the dust of the road (i.e. immediately) I hastened to the venerated tomb of Humāyūn, and there besought help in my purpose, and with my own hand distributed money to poor persons and dervishes. Thence turning to the shrine of the venerable saint S͟haik͟h Niz̤āmu-d-dīn Auliyā, I performed the dues of pilgrimage. After this I gave a portion[118] of money to Jamālu-d-dīn Ḥusain Anjū and another portion to Ḥakīm Muz̤affar that they might divide it amongst the poor and dervishes. On Saturday the 14th I stayed in Sarāy Narela.[119] This rest-house (sarāy) K͟husrau had burned as he went.
The rank of Āqā Mullā, brother of Āṣaf K͟hān, who had been exalted by becoming my servant, was fixed in original and increase at 1,000 with 300 horse. He was in close attendance during this journey. Considering that some of the Aimāqs attached to the royal army were in league with K͟husrau, and fearing that consequently some fraud or sedition might enter their minds, 2,000 rupees were given to their leaders to distribute amongst their men and make them hopeful of the Jahāngīrī favour. I gave money to S͟haik͟h Faẓlu-llah and Rāja Dhīrdhar to distribute to faqirs and brahmans on the road. I gave orders that to Rānā S͟hankar in Ajmir should be given 30,000 rupees by way of assistance for his expenditure.
On Monday, the 16th, I reached the pargana of Pānīpat.[120] This station and place used to be very propitious to my gracious father and honoured ancestors, and two great victories had been gained in it. One was the defeat of Ibrāhīm Lodī, which was won by the might of the victorious hosts of His Majesty Firdūs-makānī. The story of this has been written in the histories of the time. The second victory was over the wicked Hemū, and was manifested from the world of fortune in the beginning of the reign of my revered father, as has been described by me in detail.
At the time that K͟husrau had left Delhi and was proceeding to Panipat, it happened that Dilāwar K͟hān had arrived there. When shortly before K͟husrau’s arrival he heard of this affair, he sent his children across the Jumna and bravely determined to hasten on and throw himself into the fort of Lahore before K͟husrau should arrive. About this time ʿAbdu-r-Raḥīm also reached Panipat from Lahore, and Dilāwar K͟hān suggested to him that he too should send his children across the river, and should stand aside and await the victorious standards of Jahāngīr. As he was lethargic and timid, he could not make up his mind to do this, and delayed so much that K͟husrau arrived. He went out and waited on him, and either voluntarily or in a state of agitation agreed to accompany him. He obtained the title of Malik Anwar and the position of vizier. Dilāwar K͟hān, like a brave man, turned towards Lahore, and on his road informed everyone and everybody of the servants of the court and the karoriyān, and the merchants whom he came across, of the exodus of K͟husrau. Some he took with him, and others he told to stand aside out of the way. After that, the servants of God were relieved of the plundering by robbers and oppressors. Most probably, if Sayyid Kamāl in Delhi, and Dilāwar K͟hān at Panipat, had shown courage and determination, and had blocked K͟husrau’s path, his disorderly force would not have been able to resist and would have scattered, and he himself would have been captured. The fact is that their talents (himmat) were not equal to this, but afterwards each made amends for his fault, viz., Dilāwar K͟hān, by his rapid march, entered the fort of Lahore before K͟husrau reached it, and by this notable service made amends for his earlier shortcoming, and Sayyid Kamāl manfully exerted himself in the engagement with K͟husrau, as will be described in its own place.
On Ẕī-l-ḥijja 17th the royal standards were set up in the pargana of Karnāl. Here I raised ʿĀbidīn K͟hwāja, son of K͟hwāja Kalān Jūybārī and pīrzāda (spiritual adviser), son of ʿAbdu-llah K͟hān Ūzbeg, who had come in the time of my revered father, to the rank of 1,000. S͟haik͟h Niz̤ām Thaneswarī, who was one of the notorious impostors (s͟hayyādān) of the age, waited on K͟husrau, and having gratified him with pleasant news, again[121] led him out of the (right) path, and then came to wait on me. As I had heard of these transactions, I gave him his road expenses and told him to depart for the auspicious place of pilgrimage (Mecca). On the 19th the halt was in pargana S͟hāhābād. Here there was very little water, but it happened that heavy rain fell, so that all were rejoiced.
I promoted S͟haik͟h Aḥmad Lāhorī, who from my princehood had filled the relationship of service and discipleship and the position of a house-born one (k͟hānazāda) to the office of Mīr-i-ʿAdl (Chief Justice). Disciples[122] and sincere followers were presented on his introduction, and to each it was necessary to give the token[123] and the likeness (s͟hast u s͟habah). They were given on his recommendation (?). At the time of initiation some words of advice were given to the disciple: he must not confuse or darken his years with sectarian quarrels, but must follow the rule of universal peace with regard to religions; he must not kill any living creature with his own hand, and must not flay anything. The only exceptions are in battle and the chase.
“Be not the practiser of making lifeless any living thing.
Save in the battlefield or in the time of hunting.”
Honour the luminaries (the Sun, Moon, etc.), which are manifesters of God’s light, according to the degree of each, and recognize the power and existence of Almighty God at all times and seasons. Be careful indeed that whether in private or in public you never for a moment forget Him.
“Lame or low[124] or crooked or unrefined,
Be amorous of Him and seek after Him.”
My revered father became possessed of these principles, and was rarely void of such thoughts.
At the stage of Alūwa(?)[125] I appointed Abū-n-nabī(?)[126] Ūzbeg with fifty-seven other mansabdars to assist S͟haik͟h Farīd, and gave the force 40,000 rupees for its expenses. To Jamīl Beg were given 7,000 rupees to divide among the Aimāqs (cavalry). I also presented Mīr S͟harīf Āmulī[127] with 2,000 rupees.
On Tuesday the 24th of the same month they captured five of the attendants and comrades of K͟husrau. Two of these, who confessed to his service, I ordered to be thrown under the feet of elephants, and three who denied were placed in custody that enquiry might be made. On Farwardīn 12th of the first year of my reign, Mīrzā Ḥusain and Nūru-d-dīn Qulī the kotwāl entered Lahore, and on the 24th of the same month a messenger of Dilāwar K͟hān arrived (there) with news that K͟husrau was moving on Lahore and that they should be on their guard. On the same day the city gates were guarded and strengthened, and two days later Dilāwar K͟hān entered the fort with a few men and began to strengthen the towers and walls. Wherever these were broken and thrown down he repaired them, and, placing cannon and swivel guns on the citadel, he prepared for battle. Assembling the small number of the royal servants who were in the fort, they were assigned their several duties, and the people of the city also with loyalty gave their assistance. Two days later, and when all was ready, K͟husrau arrived, and, having fixed a place for his camp, gave orders to invest[128] the city and to prepare for battle, and to burn one of the gates on any side where one could be got at. “After taking the fort,” he said to his wicked crew, “I will give orders to plunder the city for seven days and to make captive the women and children.”
This doomed lot set fire to a gate, and Dilāwar Beg K͟hān, Ḥusain Beg the dīwān, and Nūru-d-dīn Qulī the kotwal built a wall inside opposite the gateway.
Meantime Saʿīd K͟hān, who was one of those appointed to Kashmir and was now encamped on the Chenāb, having heard the news, started rapidly for Lahore. When he reached the Ravi he sent word to the garrison of the fort that he came with a loyal intention and that they should admit him. They sent someone at night and conducted him and some of his men inside. When the siege had lasted nine days, news of the approach of the royal army came repeatedly to K͟husrau and his adherents. They became helpless (bī pā), and made up their minds that they must face the victorious army.
As Lahore is one of the greatest places in Hindustan, a great number of people gathered in six or seven days. It was reported on good authority that 10,000 or 12,000 horse were collected, and had left the city with the view of making a night attack on the royal vanguard. This news was brought to me at the sarāy of Qāẓī ʿAlī on the night of Thursday the 16th. Although it rained heavily in the night I beat the drum of march and mounted. Arriving in Sult̤ānpūr at dawn I remained there till noon. By chance, at this place and hour the victorious army encountered that ill-fated band. Muʿizzu-l-mulk had brought a dish of roast meat,[129] and I was turning towards it with zest when the news of the battle was brought to me. Though I had a longing to eat the roast meat, I immediately took a mouthful by way of augury and mounted, and without waiting for the coming up of men and without regard to the smallness of my force I went off in all haste. However much I demanded my chiltah (wadded coat), they did not produce it. My only arms were a spear and sword, but I committed myself to the favour of God and started off without hesitation. At first my escort did not number more than fifty horsemen; no one had expected a fight that day. In fine, when I reached the head of the bridge of Gobindwāl,[130] 400 or 500 horse, good and bad, had come together. When I had crossed the bridge the news of a victory was brought to me. The bearer of the good news was S͟hamsī, tūs͟hakchī (wardrobe man), and for his good news he obtained the title of K͟hūs͟h-k͟habar K͟hān. Mīr Jamālu-d-dīn Ḥusain, whom I had sent previously to advise K͟husrau, came up at the same time and said such things about the number and bravery of K͟husrau’s men as frightened his hearers. Though news of the victory came continuously, this simple-minded Sayyid would not believe it, and expressed incredulity that such an army as he had seen could be defeated by S͟haik͟h Farīd’s force, which was small and not properly equipped. When they brought K͟husrau’s litter[131] with two of his eunuchs, the Mīr admitted what had happened. Then, alighting from his horse, he placed his head at my feet and professed every kind of humility and submission, and said that there could be no higher or more lofty fortune than this.
In this command S͟haik͟h Farīd behaved with sincerity and devotion. The Sayyids of Bārha, who are of the brave ones of the age, and who have held this place in every fight in which they have been, formed the van. Saif K͟hān, son of Sayyid Maḥmūd K͟hān Bārha, the head of the tribe, had shown great bravery and had received seventeen wounds. Sayyid Jalāl, also of the brethren of this band, received an arrow in his temple and died a few days later. At the time when the Sayyids of Bārha, who were not more than fifty or sixty in number, having received wounds from 1,500 Badak͟hs͟hī horsemen, had been cut to pieces, Sayyid Kamāl, who, with his brothers, had been appointed to support the van, came up on the flank and fought with wondrous bravery and manliness. After that the men of the right wing raised the cry of Pāds͟hāh salāmat (“Long live the King”) and charged, and the rebels hearing the words, gave up and scattered abroad to various hiding-places. About 400 Aimāqs became crushed on the plain of anger and overcome by the victorious army. K͟husrau’s box of jewels and precious things which he had always with him, fell into our hands.
“Who thought that this boy of few years
Would behave so badly to his sire?
At the first taste of the cup he brings up the lees.
He melts away my glory and his own modesty.
He sets on fire[132] the throne of K͟hūrs͟hīd,
He longs for the place of Jams͟hīd.”
Short-sighted men in Allahabad had urged me also to rebel against my father. Their words were extremely unacceptable and disapproved by me. I know what sort of endurance a kingdom would have, the foundations of which were laid on hostility to a father, and was not moved by the evil counsels of such worthless men, but acting according to the dictates of reason and knowledge I waited on my father, my guide, my qibla,[133] and my visible God, and as a result of this good purpose it went well with me.
In the evening of the day of K͟husrau’s flight I gave Rāja Bāso, who is a trusty zamindar of the hill-country of Lahore, leave to go to that frontier, and, wherever he heard news or trace of K͟husrau, to make every effort to capture him. I also appointed Mahābat K͟hān and Mīrzā ʿAlī Akbars͟hāhī to a large force, which was to pursue K͟husrau in whatever direction he might go. I resolved with myself that if K͟husrau went to Kabul, I would follow him and not turn back till he was captured. If not delaying in Kabul he should go on to Badakhshan and those regions, I would leave Mahābat K͟hān in Kabul and return myself (to India). My reason for not going to Badakhshan was that that wretch would (in that case) certainly ally himself with the Ūzbegs, and the disgrace would attach to this State.
On the day on which the royal troops were ordered to pursue K͟husrau, 15,000 rupees were given to Mahābat K͟hān and 20,000 to the ahadis, and 10,000 more were sent with the army to be given to whom it might be necessary to give it on the way.
On Saturday, the 28th, the victorious camp was pitched at Jaipāl,[134] which lies seven kos from Lahore. On the same day K͟husrau arrived with a few men on the bank of the Chenāb. The brief account of what had happened is that after his defeat those who had escaped with him from the battle became divided in opinion. The Afghans and Indians, who were mostly his old retainers, wished to double back like foxes into Hindustan, and to become a source of rebellion and trouble there. Ḥusain Beg, whose people and family and treasure were in the direction of Kabul, suggested going to Kabul. In the end, as action was taken according to the wish of Ḥusain Beg, the Hindustanis and the Afghans decided to separate themselves from him. On arriving at the Chenāb, he proposed to cross at the ferry of S͟hāhpūr, which is one of the recognized crossings, but as he could find no boats there he made for the ferry of Sodharah, where his people got one boat without boatmen and another full of firewood and grass.
The ferries over the rivers had been stopped because before K͟husrau’s defeat orders had been given to all the jagirdars and the superintendents of roads and crossings in the subah of the Panjab that as this kind of dispute had arisen they must all be on the alert. Ḥusain Beg wished to transfer the men from the boat with firewood and grass to the other, so that they might convey K͟husrau across. At this juncture arrived Kīlan,[135] son-in-law of Kamāl Chaudharī of Sodharah, and saw a body of men about to cross in the night. He cried out to the boatmen that there was an order from the king Jahāngīr forbidding unknown men from crossing in the night, and that they must be careful. Owing to the noise and uproar, the people of the neighbourhood gathered together, and Kamāl’s son-in-law took from the boatmen the pole with which they propel the boat, and which in Hindustani is called ballī, and thus made the boat unmanageable. Although money was offered to the boatmen, not one would ferry them over. News went to Abū-l-Qāsim Namakīn, who was at Gujarat, near the Chenāb, that a body of men were wanting to cross the river by night, and he at once came to the ferry in the night with his sons and some horsemen. Things went to such a length that Ḥusain Beg shot arrows at the boatmen,[136] and Kamāl’s son-in-law also took to shooting arrows from the river-bank. For four kos the boat took its own way down the river, until at the end of the night it grounded, and try as they would they could not get it off. Meantime it became day. Abū-l-Qāsim and K͟hwāja K͟hiẓr K͟hān, who by the efforts of Hilāl K͟hān had assembled on this (? the west) side of the river, fortified its west bank, and the zamindars fortified it on the east.
Before this affair of K͟husrau’s, I had sent Hilāl K͟hān as sazāwal to the army appointed for Kashmīr under Saʿīd K͟hān, and by chance he arrived in the neighbourhood (of the ferry) that same night; he came in the nick of time, and his efforts had great effect in bringing together Abū-l-Qāsim K͟hān Namakīn, and K͟hwāja K͟hiẓr K͟hān in the capture of K͟husrau.
On the morning of Sunday, the 24th of the aforesaid month, people on elephants and in boats captured K͟husrau, and on Monday, the last day of the month, news of this reached me in the garden of Mīrzā Kāmrān. I immediately ordered the Amīru-l-umarā to go to Gujarat and to bring K͟husrau to wait on me.
In counsels on State affairs and government it often happens that I act according to my own judgment and prefer my own counsel to that of others. In the first instance I had elected to wait on my revered father from Allahabad in opposition to the advice of my faithful servants, and I obtained the blessing of serving him, and this was for my spiritual and temporal good. By the same course of conduct I had become king. The second instance was the pursuit of K͟husrau, from which I was not held back by taking time to ascertain the (auspicious) hour, etc., and from which I took no rest until I captured him. It is a strange thing that after I had started I asked Ḥakīm ʿAlī, who is learned in mathematics, how the hour of my departure had been (i.e. whether propitious or not), and he replied that in order to obtain my object if I had wished to select an hour, there could not have been for years one selected better than that in which I mounted.
On Thursday, Muḥarram 3rd, 1015, in Mīrzā Kāmrān’s garden, they brought K͟husrau before me with his hands tied and chains on his legs from the left side[137] after the manner and custom of Chingīz K͟hān. They made Ḥusain Beg stand on his right hand and ʿAbdu-r-Raḥīm on his left. K͟husrau stood weeping and trembling between them. Ḥusain Beg, with the idea that it might profit him, began to speak wildly. When his purport became apparent to me I did not allow him to continue talking, but handed over K͟husrau in chains, and ordered these two villains to be put in the skins of an ox and an ass, and that they should be mounted on asses with their faces to the tail[138] and thus taken round the city. As the ox-hide dried more quickly than that of the ass, Ḥusain Beg remained alive for four watches and died from suffocation. ʿAbdu-r-Raḥīm, who was in the ass’s skin and to whom they gave some refreshment from outside, remained alive.
From Monday, the last day of Ẕī-l-ḥijja, until the 9th of Muḥarram of the aforesaid year, I remained in Mīrzā Kāmrān’s garden because the time was unpropitious.[139] I bestowed Bhairawal,[140] where the battle had taken place, on S͟haik͟h Farīd, and rewarded him with the high title of Murtaẓā K͟hān. For the sake of good government I ordered posts to be set up on both sides of the road from the garden to the city, and ordered them to hang up and impale the seditious Aimāqs and others who had taken part in the rebellion. Thus each one of them received an extraordinary punishment. I gave headship to those landholders who had shown loyalty, and to every one of the Chaudharīs between the Jhelam and the Chenāb I gave lands for their support.
Of Ḥusain Beg’s property there were obtained from the house of Mīr Muḥammad Bāqī nearly seven lakhs of rupees. This was exclusive of what he had made over to other places and of what he had with him. After this, whenever his name is mentioned, the words[141] gāwān u k͟harān (bullocks and asses) will be used. When he came to this Court in company with Mīrzā S͟hāhruk͟h he had one horse. By degrees his affairs flourished so that he became possessed of treasure both visible and buried, and projects of this kind entered his mind.
While K͟husrau’s affair was still in the will of God, as there was no actual governor between Afghanistan and Agra, which is a source of sedition and mischief, and, fearing that K͟husrau’s affair might be prolonged, I ordered my son Parwīz to leave some of the sardars to look after the Rānā and to come to Agra with Āṣaf K͟hān and a body of those nearly connected with him in the service. He was to consider the protection and management of that region his special charge. But by the blessed favour of Allah, K͟husrau’s affair was settled before Parwīz arrived in Agra; I accordingly ordered my aforesaid son to come and wait on me.
On Wednesday, Muḥarram 8th, I auspiciously entered the fort of Lahore. A number of loyalists represented to me that my return to Agra would be for the good of the State at this time when much was going amiss in Gujarat, in the Deccan, and in Bengal. This counsel did not meet with my approval, for the reports of S͟hāh Beg K͟hān, the governor of Qandahar, showed that the officers of the Persian border were meditating an attack on that fortress. They had been moved thereto by the machinations of the residuum of the Mirzas of Qandahar’s army, which was always shaking the chain of contention. The Persian officers had written letters to these malcontents, and there was likelihood of a disturbance. It occurred to me that the death of His Majesty Akbar and the unreasonable outbreak of K͟husrau might put an edge on their design, and that they might attack Qandahar. What had occurred to my mind became a realized fact. The governor of Farāh, the Malik of Sīstan, and the jagirdars of that neighbourhood, with the assistance of Ḥusain K͟hān, the governor of Herat, invaded Qandahar. Praise is due to the manliness and courage of S͟hāh Beg K͟hān, who planted his foot firmly like a man, and strengthened the fort, and seated himself on the top of the third(?) citadel of the aforesaid fort in such a manner that outsiders could see his entertainments. During the siege he girded not his loins, but with bare head and feet arranged parties of pleasure; yet no day passed that he did not send a force from the fort to meet the foe and did not make manly efforts. This went on as long as he was in the fort. The Qizilbās͟h army had invested on three sides. When news of this reached Lahore it was clearly advisable to remain in that neighbourhood. A large force was immediately appointed under the leadership of Mīrzā G͟hāzī, who was accompanied by a number of men of rank and servants of the Court, such as Qarā Beg and Tuk͟hta Beg, who had been promoted with the titles of Qarā K͟hān and Sardār K͟hān. I appointed Mīrzā G͟hāzī to a mansab of 5,000 personal, and horsemen, and bestowed drums on him. Mīrzā G͟hāzi was the son of Mīrzā Jānī Tark͟hān, king of Thathah (Sind), and by the efforts of ʿAbdu-r-Raḥīm K͟hānk͟hānān that country had been conquered in the reign of the late king. The country of Thathah was included in his jagir, and he held the rank with personality and horsemen of 5,000. After his death his son Mīrzā G͟hāzi was raised to his rank and service. Their ancestors were among the amirs of Sult̤ān Ḥusain Mīrzā Bāy-qarā, the ruler of Khurasan, and they were originally descended from the amirs of Tīmūr (Ṣāḥib-qirānī). K͟hwāja ʿĀqil was appointed bakhshi of this army; 43,000 rupees were given to Qarā K͟hān for road expenses, and 15,000 to Naqdī Beg and Qilīj Beg, who were to accompany Mīrzā G͟hāzī. I determined to stay at Lahore in order to settle this matter and with the intention of a tour to Kabul. About this time the rank of Ḥakīm Fatḥu-llah was fixed, original and increased, at 1,000 personality and 300 horse. As S͟haik͟h Ḥusain Jāmī had had dreams about me which had come true, I gave him twenty lakhs of dams, equivalent to 30,000 or 40,000 rupees, for the expenses of himself and his monastery and the dervishes who were with him. On the 22nd I promoted ʿAbdu-llah K͟hān to the rank of 2,500 personal and 500 horse, original and increased. I ordered to be given to the ahadis two lakhs of rupees to be paid in advance and deducted by degrees from their monthly pay. I bestowed 6,000 rupees on Qāsim Beg K͟hān, the son-in-law of S͟hāh Beg K͟hān, and 3,000 rupees on Sayyid Bahādur K͟hān.
In Gobindwāl, which is on the river Bīyāh (Beas), there was a Hindu named Arjun,[142] in the garments of sainthood and sanctity, so much so that he had captured many of the simple-hearted of the Hindus, and even of the ignorant and foolish followers of Islam, by his ways and manners, and they had loudly sounded the drum of his holiness. They called him Gūrū, and from all sides stupid people crowded to worship and manifest complete faith in him. For three or four generations (of spiritual successors) they had kept this shop warm. Many times it occurred to me to put a stop to this vain affair or to bring him into the assembly of the people of Islam.
At last when K͟husrau passed along this road this insignificant fellow proposed to wait upon him. K͟husrau happened to halt at the place where he was, and he came out and did homage to him. He behaved to K͟husrau in certain special ways, and made on his forehead a finger-mark in saffron, which the Indians (Hinduwān) call qas͟hqa,[143] and is considered propitious. When this came to my ears and I clearly understood his folly, I ordered them to produce him and handed over his houses, dwelling-places, and children to Murtaẓā K͟hān, and having confiscated his property commanded that he should be put to death.
There were two men named Rājū and Ambā, who, under the shadow of the protection of the eunuch Daulat K͟hān, made their livelihood by oppression and tyranny, and had done many acts of oppression in the few days that K͟husrau was before Lahore. I ordered Rājū to the gallows and a fine to be taken from Ambā, who was reputed to be wealthy. In short, 15,000 rupees were collected from him, which sum I ordered them to expend on bulg͟hur-k͟hānas (refectories) and in charity.
Saʿdu-llah K͟hān, son of Saʿd K͟hān, was promoted to the rank of 2,000 personal and 1,000 horse.
In his great desire to wait upon me, Parwīz traversed long distances in a short time, in the rainy season and incessant rain, and on Thursday, the 29th, when two watches and three ghaṛī of day had passed, obtained the blessing of seeing me. With exceeding kindness and affection, I took him into the embrace of favour and kissed his forehead.
When this disgraceful conduct showed itself in K͟husrau, I had resolved not to delay in any place till I had captured him. There was a probability that he might turn back towards Hindustan, so it appeared impolitic to leave Agra empty, as it was the centre of the State, the abode of the ladies of the holy harem, and the depository of the world’s treasures. On these accounts I had written when leaving Agra to Parwīz, saying that his loyalty had had this result, that K͟husrau had fled and that Fortune had turned her face toward himself; that I had started in pursuit of K͟husrau, and that he should consequently dispose of the affairs of the Rānā in some way according to the necessity of the time, and for the benefit of the kingdom should himself come quickly to Agra. I had delivered into his charge the capital and treasury, which was equal to the wealth of Qārūn,[144] and I had commended him to the God of power. Before this letter reached Parwīz, the Rānā had been so humbled that he had sent to Āṣaf K͟hān to say that as by his own acts he had come to shame and disgrace, he hoped that he would intercede for him in such a way that the prince would be content with his sending Bāgha,[145] who was one of his sons. Parwīz had not agreed to this, and said that either the Rānā himself should come or that he should send Karan. Meantime the news of K͟husrau’s disturbance arrived, and on its account Āṣaf K͟hān and other loyalists agreed to the coming of Bāgha, who obtained the blessing of waiting on the prince near Manḍalgaṛh.
Parwīz, leaving Rāja Jagannāth and most of the chiefs of his army, started for Agra with Āṣaf K͟hān and some of those near to him and his own attendants, and with him brought Bāgha to the Court. When he came near Agra he heard the news of the victory over K͟husrau and his capture, and after resting two days an order reached him that as matters appeared settled in all quarters he should betake himself to me, in order that on the prescribed date he might obtain the good fortune of waiting on me. I bestowed on him the parasol (āftāb-gīr),[146] which is one of the signs of royalty, and I gave him the rank of 10,000 and sent an order to the officials to grant him a tank͟hwāh jagir. At this time I sent Mīrzā ʿAlī Beg to Kashmir; 10,000 rupees were delivered to Qāẓī ʿIzzatu-llah to divide amongst faqirs and the poor of Kabul. Aḥmad Beg K͟hān was promoted to the rank of 2,000 personal and 1,250 horse, original and extra. At the same time Muqarrab K͟hān, who had been sent to Burhanpur to bring the children of Dāniyāl, returned after an absence of 6 months 22 days and had the honour of an audience, and related in detail what had occurred in those regions.
Saif K͟hān was promoted to the rank of 2,000 personal and 1,000 horse. S͟haik͟h ʿAbdu-l-Wahhāb[147] of the Buk͟hara sayyids, who was governor of Delhi under the late king, was dismissed from the post (by me) for certain ill-deeds done by his men, and was entered amongst the holders of subsistence lands and the arbāb-i-saʿādat.
In the whole of the hereditary dominions, both the crown lands and the jagirs, I ordered the preparation of bulg͟hur-k͟hānas (free eating-houses), where cooked food might be provided for the poor according to their condition, and so that residents and travellers both might reap the benefit.
Amba[148] K͟hān Kashmīrī, who was of the stock of the rulers of Kashmir, was selected for the rank of 1,000 personal and 300 horse. On Monday, Rabīʿu-l-āk͟hir 9th, I gave Parwīz a special sword; and jewelled swords were presented also to Qut̤bu-d-dīn K͟hān Koka and the Amīru-l-umarā. I saw Dāniyāl’s children, whom Muqarrab K͟hān had brought; there were three sons and four daughters. The boys bore the names T̤ahmūras̤,[149] Bāysung͟har, and Hūs͟hang. Such kindness and affection were shown by me to these children as no one thought possible. I resolved that T̤ahmūras̤, who was the eldest, should always be in waiting on me, and the others were handed over to the charge of my own sisters.
A special dress of honour was sent to Rāja Mān Singh in Bengal. I ordered a reward of 30 lakhs of dams to Mīrzā G͟hāzi. I bestowed on S͟haik͟h Ibrāhīm, son of Qut̤bu-d-dīn K͟hān Koka, the rank of 1,000 personal and 300 horse, and dignified him with the title of Kis͟hwar K͟hān.
As when I started in pursuit of K͟husrau I had left my son K͟hurram in charge of the palaces and treasury, I now, when that affair had been settled, ordered the said son to attend upon Haẓrat Maryam-zamānī and the other ladies, and to escort them to me. When they reached the neighbourhood of Lahore, on Friday the 12th of the month mentioned, I embarked in a boat and went to a village named Dahr to meet my mother, and I had the good fortune to be received by her. After the performance of obeisance and prostration and greeting which is due from the young to the old according to the custom of Chingīz, the rules of Tīmūr and common usage, and after worship of the King of the World (God), and after finishing this business, I obtained leave to return, and re-entered the fort of Lahore.
On the 17th, having appointed Muʿizzu-l̄-mulk bakhshi of the army against the Rānā, I dismissed him to it. As news had come of the rebellion of Rāy Rāy Singh and his son, Dulīp, in the neighbourhood of Nāgor, I ordered Rāja Jagannāth to proceed against them with others of the servants of the State and Muʿizzu-l-mulk, and to put a stop to this disturbance. I gave 50,000 rupees to Sardār K͟hān, who had been appointed to the place of S͟hāh Beg K͟hān as Governor of Qandahar, and I promoted him to the rank of 3,000 personal and 2,500 horse. To K͟hiẓr K͟hān, the late ruler of K͟handesh, were given 3,000 rupees, and to his brother, Aḥmad K͟hān,[150] who is one of the k͟hānazādas of the State. Hās͟him K͟hān, son of Qāsim K͟hān, who is one of the house-born of the State, and worthy of advancement, I promoted to the rank of 2,500 personal and 1,500 horse. I gave him also one of my own horses. I sent robes of honour to eight individuals amongst the nobles of the army of the Deccan.[151] Five thousand rupees were given to Niz̤ām of Shiraz, the story-teller. Three thousand rupees were given for the expenses of the bulg͟hūr-k͟hāna of Kashmir to the wakīl of Mīrzā ʿAlī Beg, the governor of that place, to send to Srinagar. I presented a jewelled dagger of the value of 6,000 rupees to Qut̤bu-d-dīn K͟hān.
News reached me that S͟haik͟h Ibrāhīm Bābā, the Afghan, had opened a religious establishment (lit. one of being a shaikh and having disciples) in one of the parganas[152] of Lahore, and as his doings were disreputable and foolish a considerable number of Afghans had collected round him. I ordered him to be brought and handed over to Parwīz to be kept in the fort of Chunar; so this vain disturbance was put an end to.
On Sunday, 7th Jumādā-l-awwal, many of the mansabdars and ahadis were promoted: Mahābat K͟hān obtained the rank of 2,000 personal and 1,300 horse, Dilāwar K͟hān 2,000 personal and 1,400 horse, Wazīru-l-mulk 1,300 personal and 550 horse, Qayyām K͟hān 1,000 personal and horse, S͟hyām Singh 1,500 personal and 1,200 horse; in the same way forty-two mansabdars were promoted. On most days the same observances occur. I presented Parwīz with a ruby of the value of 25,000 rupees. On Wednesday the 9th of the aforesaid month, the 21st of S͟hahrīwar,[153] after three watches and four gharis, the feast for my solar weighing, which is the commencement of the 38th year of my age, took place. According to custom they got ready the weighing apparatus and the scales in the house of Maryam-zamānī (his mother). At the moment appointed blessings were invoked and I sate in the scales. Each suspending rope was held by an elderly person who offered up prayers. The first time the weight in gold came to three Hindustani maunds and ten seers. After this I was weighed against several metals, perfumes, and essences, up to twelve weighings, the details of which will be given hereafter. Twice a year I weigh myself against gold and silver and other metals, and against all sorts of silks and cloths, and various grains, etc., once at the beginning of the solar year and once at that of the lunar. The weight of the money of the two weighings I hand over to the different treasurers for faqirs and those in want. On the same auspicious day I promoted Qut̤bu-d-dīn K͟hān Koka, who for many years had expected such a day,[154] with various favours. First, I gave him the rank of 5,000 personal and horse, and with this a special robe of honour, a jewelled sword, and one of my own horses, with a jewelled saddle, and I gave him leave to go to the subahdarship of the province of Bengal and Orissa, which is a place for 50,000 horse. As a mark of honour he set off accompanied by a large force, and two lakhs of rupees were given him as a sumptuary allowance. My connection with his mother is such that as in my childhood I was under her guardianship and care, I have not so much affection for my own mother as for her. She is to me my gracious mother, and I do not hold him less dear than my own brothers and children. Qut̤bu-d-dīn is the foster-brother who is most fit for fosterage. I gave 300,000 rupees to his auxiliaries. On this day I sent 130,000 as a marriage present (sāchiq) for the daughter of Pahārī (his brother Murād), who had been betrothed to Parwīz.
On the 22nd, Bāz Bahādur Qalmāq, who had long been guilty of evil practices in Bengal, by the guidance of fortune obtained the honour of kissing my threshold. I gave him a jewelled dagger, 8,000 rupees, and promoted him to the rank of 1,000 personal and horse. One lakh of rupees and cash and jewels were bestowed on Parwīz. Kesho Dās Mārū was promoted to the grade of 1,500 personal and horse. Abū-l-ḥasan, who had been the diwan and factotum of my brother Dāniyāl, together with his children,[155] had the honour of an audience, and was raised to the rank of 1,000 personal and 500 horse. On the 1st of the second Jumādā S͟haik͟h Bāyazīd,[156] who was one of the s͟haik͟hzādas of Sīkrī, well known for brilliance of understanding and knowledge, and the connection of old service,[157] was honoured with the title of Muʿaz̤z̤am K͟hān, and to him I gave the government of Delhi. On the 21st of the same month I presented Parwīz with a necklace composed of four rubies and one hundred pearls. The rank of Ḥakīm Muz̤affar was fixed at 3,000 personal and 1,000 horse, original and extra. I gave 5,000 rupees to Nathu Māl (?), Rāja of Manjholi.[158]
A remarkable occurrence was the discovery of a letter from Mīrzā ʿAzīz Koka to ʿAlī K͟hān, the ruler of K͟handesh. I had had an impression that he had a particular enmity to me on K͟husrau’s account, who was his son-in-law. From the discovery of this writing it became clear that he had never given up his innate treachery, and had adopted this unbecoming attitude towards my revered father also. In short, this letter which he had written at some time to Rāja ʿAlī K͟hān was from beginning to end full of abuse and disapprobation, and said things which no enemy even could have written and such as could not be attributed to anyone, and far less to one like His Majesty, ʿArs͟h-ās͟hyānī, a king and an appreciative sovereign, who from childhood had educated him and brought him up because of what was due for services rendered by his mother, and raised the standard of reliance on him to such a high degree as no other person possessed. This letter fell into the hands of K͟hwāja Abū-l-ḥasan in Burhanpur amongst the property of Rāja ʿAlī K͟hān. He brought and laid it before me. In reading and seeing it the hair on my limbs stood on end. But for the consideration and due recognition of the fact that his mother had given her milk to my father I could have killed him with my own hand. Having procured his attendance I gave the letter into his hand and told him to read it with a loud voice to those present. When he saw the letter I thought his body would have parted from his soul, but with shamelessness and impudence he read it as though he had not written it and was reading it by order. Those present in that paradise-like assembly of the servants of Akbar and Jahāngīr and heard the letter read, loosened the tongue of reproach and of curses and abuse. I put the question to him, “Leaving aside the treacheries which in reliance on your worthless self you contrived against my fortune, what was done to you by my father, who raised you and your family from the dust of the road to such wealth and dignity as to make you the envy of your contemporaries, that you should write these things to the enemies of his Empire? Why did you enrol yourself amongst the wicked and disloyal? Truly, what can one make of an original nature and innate disposition? Since your temperament has been nourished by the water of treachery, what else can spring up but such actions? Passing over what you did to myself, I gave you the rank you had held before, thinking that your treachery was directed against me only. Since it has become known that you behaved in a similar way to your benefactor and visible Deity, I leave you to the thoughts and actions which you formerly had and still have.” After these remarks his lips closed, and he was unable to make any reply. What could he have said in the presence of such disgrace? I gave an order to deprive him of his jagir. Although what this ingrate had done was unpardonable, yet in the end, from certain considerations, I passed it over.
On Sunday the 26th of the above-mentioned month was held the marriage feast of Parwīz and the daughter of Prince Murād. The ceremony was performed in the house of Her Highness Maryam-zamānī. The entertainment was arranged in the house of Parwīz, and all who were present were exalted with all kinds of honour and civilities. Nine thousand rupees were handed over to S͟harif Āmulī and other nobles, to be given in alms to faqirs and other poor people.
On Sunday the 10th Rajab I left the city to hunt in Girjhak and Nandana,[159] and took up my quarters in the garden of Rām Dās, where I remained four days.
On Wednesday the 13th the solar weighing of Parwīz took place. They weighed him twelve times against various metals and other things, and each weighing came to two maunds and eighteen seers. I ordered the whole to be distributed amongst faqirs. At this time the rank of S͟hajāʿat K͟hān was fixed at 1,500 personal and 700 horse, original and extra.
After the march of Mīrzā G͟hāzī and his force it occurred to me to send a second contingent after him. Having bestowed on Bahādur[160] K͟hān Qūrbegī the rank of 1,500 personal and 800 horse, original and extra, I started off a body of cavalry,[161] which came to about 3,000, with him under the leadership of S͟hāh Beg and Muḥammad Amīn. For the expenses of this force 200,000 rupees were given and 1,000 musketeers were also appointed.
I left Āṣaf K͟hān to guard K͟husrau and defend Lahore. The Amīru-l-umarā was deprived of the honour of waiting on me, as he had a severe illness and remained in the city. ʿAbdu-r-Razzāq Maʿmūrī, who had been summoned from the Rānā’s country, was promoted to be bakhshi at headquarters, and it was ordered that in company with ʿAbū-l-ḥasan he should perform this service permanently. Following my father’s rule, I appoint two men in association in the discharge of the chief offices, not from want of confidence in them, but because, as they are mortal and no man is safe from accidents or illness, if any confusion or obstacle should present itself to one the other is there so that the affairs of the servants of God may not come to ruin.
At this time also news came that at the Dasahrā, which is one of the fixed feast days of the Hindus, ʿAbdu-llah K͟hān had made an incursion from Kālpī, which is his jagir, into the province of Bandīlah, and displaying great valour made prisoner Rām Chand, son of Madhūkar, who for a long time had made a centre of disturbance in that difficult country and taken him to Kālpī. For this service he was presented with a standard and raised to 3,000 personal and 2,000 horse.
Petitions from the subah of Bihar represented that Jahāngīr Qulī K͟hān had had a battle with Sangrām, one of the chief zamindars of Bihar, who had about 4,000 horse and innumerable foot, on account of certain opposition and disloyalty on rough land, and that on the field the aforesaid K͟hān had exerted himself manfully. In the end Sangrām died of a gunshot wound; many of his men fell in the battle, and those saved from the sword took to flight. Since this distinguished affair had been brought about by Jahāngīr Qulī K͟hān, I promoted him to the rank of 4,500 personal and 3,500 horse.
Three months and six days passed by in hunting; 581 animals were captured with the gun, hunting leopards and nets, and a qamargāh; of these 158 were killed by my own gun. The qamargah was held twice; on one occasion in Girjhāk, when the ladies were present, 155 animals were killed; and the second time, in Nandīna, 110.[162] The details of the animals killed are as follows: mountain sheep, 180; mountain goats, 29; wild asses, 10; Nilgai, 9; antelope, etc., 348.
On Wednesday the 16th Shawwāl I returned safe from my hunting, and when one watch and six gharis of day had passed I entered Lahore on the day named. During this hunting a strange affair was witnessed. At Chandwālah, where a minaret had been erected, I had wounded in the belly a black antelope. When wounded, a sound proceeded from him such as I have never heard from any antelope, except in the rutting season. Old hunters and those with me were astonished, and said they never remembered nor had they heard from their fathers that such a voice issued from an antelope except at rutting time. This has been written down because it is not void of strangeness. I found the flesh of the mountain goat more delicious than that of all wild animals, although its skin is exceedingly ill-odoured, so much so that even when tanned the scent is not destroyed. I ordered one of the largest of the he-goats to be weighed; it was 2 maunds and 24 seers, equal to 21 foreign maunds (Persian). I ordered a large ram to be weighed, and it came to 2 maunds and 3 seers Akbarī, equal to 17 Persian (wilāyatī) maunds. The largest and strongest of the wild asses weighed 9 maunds and 16 seers, equal to 76 Persian (wilāyatī) maunds. I have frequently heard from hunters and those fond of the chase that at a certain regular time a worm develops in the horns of the mountain ram, and that this worm causes an irritation which induces the ram to fight with his hind, and that if he finds no rival he strikes his head against a tree or a rock to allay the irritation. After enquiry it seems that the same worm appears in the horn of the female sheep, and since the female does not fight the statement is clearly untrue. Though the flesh of the wild ass is lawful food and most men like to eat it, it was in no way suited to my taste.
Inasmuch as before this time the punishment of Dulīp and of his father, Rāy Rāy Singh, had been ordered, there now came news that Zāhid K͟hān, the son of Ṣādiq K͟hān, and ʿAbdu-r-Raḥīm, son of S͟haik͟h Abū-l-faẓl, and Rānā S͟hankar and Muʿizzu-l-mulk, with another force of mansabdars and followers of the Court, had heard news of Dulīp in the neighbourhood of Nāgor, which is in the subah of Ajmir, and having moved against him had found him. As he could find no way of escape, of necessity he planted a firm foot and came to blows with the royal army. After a short encounter he was badly beaten and gave over many to slaughter, and himself, taking with him his own effects, fled into the vale of ruin.
“With broken arms and loosened belt,
No power to fight and no care for head.”
In spite of his old age, I continued Qilīj K͟hān in his mansab because of his service under my father, and I ordered that he should get a jagir in the sarkar of Kālpī.
In the month Ẕī-l-qaʿda the mother of Qut̤bu-d-dīn K͟hān Koka, who had given me her milk and was as a mother to me or even kinder than my own kind mother, and in whose lap I had been brought up from infancy, was committed to the mercy of God. I placed the feet of her corpse on my shoulders and carried her a part of the way (to her grave). Through extreme grief and sorrow I had no inclination for some days to eat, and I did not change my clothes.
[1] That is, he was 37 years 3 months by the lunar calendar, and 36 years 1 month by solar reckoning (Pāds͟hāhnāma, i, 69). Elliot and all the MSS. have 8th Jumādā-s̤-s̤ānī as the date of the accession, but this is clearly wrong, as Akbar did not die till 13th Jumādā-s̤-s̤ānī. Evidently the copyists have, as is so often the case, misread bistam as has͟htam. See Blochmann’s remark, p. 454, note 3. That Jahāngīr was not at this time 38 is shown by his stating at p. 37 that he celebrated his 38th birthday at Lahore after the capture of K͟husrau. [↑]
[3] The couplet appears in Masʿūd’s divan, B.M. MS. Egerton, 701, p. 142a, line 4. The preceding lines show that the dust (gard) referred to in the first line means the dust caused by the invading army. I take the words barū bārhāī to mean the battlements or pinnacles of the fortress, the ī at the end of bārhā being intensive. [↑]
[4] Erskine’s manuscript translation of the Tūzuk-i-Jahāngīrī, B.M. MS. Add. 26,611, and the B.M. MS. have chīnī, not ḥabs͟hī. But I.O. MS. No. 181 and the R.A.S. MS. have ḥusainī, and this seems right. See Memoirs, Leyden & Erskine, p. 326, and the Haidarabad Turkī text, p. 284. The kis͟hmis͟hī is a small grape like that of which currants are made. [↑]
[5] Cf. infra the account of the 11th year, p. 173. [↑]
[6] See Memoirs. L. & E., p. 330. [↑]
[7] The name rāe bel is not given in Clarke’s Roxburgh, but perhaps it is one of the jessamines, and may be the bela of Clarke (p. 30). The rāe bel is described by Abū-l-faẓl (Blochmann, pp. 76 and 82). The statement about its flowers being double and treble is obscure. Erskine renders the passage “The leaves are generally two and three fold.” The Persian word is t̤abaqa, which apparently is equivalent to the tūī or fold of the Āyīn-i-Akbarī, Persian text, i, 96. The reference may be to the flowers growing in umbels. [↑]
[8] This is the bokul of Indian gardens (Clarke, p. 313), and well deserves Jahāngīr’s praise. It is probably the bholsārī mentioned in the Āyīn (Blochmann, No. 10, p. 83). Blochmann gives bholsirī (p. 70) as the name of a fruit-tree, and the bholsārī of p. 83 maybe a mistake for mūlsarī. [↑]
[9] The text has sewtī, but the sewtī seems to be the Rosa glandulifera of Roxburgh (Clarke, p. 407) and has no resemblance to the Pandanus. See also the description of the sewtī, Blochmann, p. 82. (Perhaps there are two sewtīs, one famous for fragrance, the other for beauty. See l.c., pp. 76 and 82.) What is meant in the text is evidently a Pandanus and the ketkī of Blochmann, p. 83. I have followed, therefore, I.O. MS. 181, and have substituted ketkī for sewtī. The ketkī may be Pandanus inermis, which has no thorns (Clarke, p. 708). Erskine also has ketkī. [↑]
[11] Du Jarric, who got his information from missionary reports, seems to imply that the chain was of silver, and says that Jahāngīr was following the idea of an old Persian king. It is mentioned in the Siyar al-mutaʾak͟hk͟hirīn (reprint, i, 230) that Muḥammad S͟hāh in 1721 revived this, and hung a long chain with a bell attached to it from the octagon tower which looked towards the river. [↑]
[12] In text this is wrongly made part of regulation 2. [↑]
[13] Gladwin and the MSS. have dilbahra (exhilarating drink), and this is probably correct. Jahāngīr would know little about rice-spirit. [↑]
[14] This regulation is more fully expounded in Price, p. 7. [↑]
[15] It is curious that Jahāngīr should give the 18th Rabīʿu-l-awwal as his birthday, while the authorities give it as the 17th. Probably the mistake has arisen from Jahāngīr’s writing Rabīʿu-l-awwal instead of S͟hahrīwar. His birthday was Ras͟hn the 18th day of S͟hahrīwar (see Akbarnāma, ii, 344), but it was the 17th Rabīʿu-l-awwal. See Muḥammad Hādī’s preface, p. 2, and Beale, and Jahāngīr’s own statement a few lines above. Possibly Jahāngīr wished to make out that he was born on the 18th Rabīʿu-l-awwal and a Thursday, because he regarded Thursday as a blessed day (mubārak s͟hamba), whilst he regarded Wednesday as peculiarly unlucky, and called it kam, or gam, s͟hamba. [↑]
[16] Cf. Elliot’s translation, vi, 513, and note 2. [↑]
[17] The MSS. have “the subsistence lands of people in general (ahālī) and the aimas.” [↑]
[18] In the text and in Elliot, vi, 515, this is made a separate order, but it is not so in the MSS. If it were, we should have thirteen instead of twelve regulations. This is avoided in text and in Elliot by putting the 8th and 7th regulations into one ordinance. With regard to the regulation about releasing the prisoners, Sir Henry Elliot is somewhat unjust to Jahāngīr in his commentary at p. 515. It was only those who had been long imprisoned whom Jahāngīr released, and his proceedings at Ranthambhor in the 13th year (Tūzuk, p. 256) show that he exercised discrimination in releasing prisoners. The account in Price, p. 10, may also be consulted. There Jahāngīr says he released 7,000 men from Gwalior alone. It may be remembered that most of these were political offenders. Private criminals were for the most part put to death, or mutilated, or fined. There were no regular jails. [↑]
[19] The above translation of the Institutes should be compared with Sir Henry Elliot’s translation and his commentary: History of India, E. & D., vol. vi, Appendix, p. 493. [↑]
[20] Erskine’s MS. has īs̤ārī for nis̤ārī, and ak͟htar-i-qabūl instead of k͟hair-i-qabūl. [↑]
[21] This is Blochmann’s Āṣaf K͟hān No. iii, viz. Mīrzā Jaʿfar Beg. See pp. 368 and 411. [↑]
[22] The words Āftāb-i-Mamlakat yield, according to the numeration by abjad, the date 1014 A.H. (1605). [↑]
[23] Page 4 of the text is followed by engravings of the coins of Jahāngīr and the inscriptions thereon, for which the editor, Saiyid Aḥmad, says he is indebted to Mr. Thornhill, the Judge of Meerut. They do not show the lines of poetry. There is an interesting article on the couplets on Jahāngīr’s coins by Mr. C. J. Rodgers, J.A.S.B. for 1888, p. 18. [↑]
[24] The chronogram is ingenious. The words Ṣāḥib-Qirān-i-S̤ānī yield only 1013 according to abjad, and this is a year too little. But the verse states that Prosperity (or Fortune), Iqbāl, laid his head at the second lord of conjunction’s feet, and the head of Iqbāl, according to the parlance of chronogram-composers, is the first letter of the word, that is, alif, which stands for one (ا) in abjad, and so the date 1014 is made up. Ṣāḥib-Qirān-i-S̤ānī means ‘the second lord of conjunction,’ and is a title generally applied to S͟hāh Jahān; the first lord of conjunction (i.e the conjunction of Jupiter and Venus) was Tīmūr. [↑]
[25] A great officer under Humāyūn and Akbar. See Āyīn, Blochmann, p. 317. [↑]
[26] Blochmann, p. 331. He had 1,200 eunuchs. He is generally styled Saʿīd Chag͟hatai. The exact nature of his relationship does not appear. It is not mentioned in his biography in the Maʾās̤ir, ii, 403. Perhaps the word (nisbat) does not here mean affinity by marriage. [↑]
[27] According to the account in Price, p. 16, and in the Maʾās̤ir, ii, 405, Saʿīd K͟hān gave a bond that if his people were oppressive he would forfeit his head. [↑]
[28] He does not seem to have had any real power, and he was soon superseded. See Maʾās̤ir, iii, 932. [↑]
[29] It appears from Erskine and from I.O. MS. that this is a mistake for Yātis͟h-begī, ‘Captain of the Watch,’ and that the name is Amīnu-d-dīn, and not Amīnu-d-daula. See Akbarnāma, iii, 474, etc. [↑]
[30] S͟harīf K͟hān had been sent by Akbar to recall Jahāngīr to his duty, but instead of coming back he stayed on. He did not accompany Jahāngīr when the latter went off the second time to wait upon his father. Probably he was afraid to do so. Jahāngīr appointed him to Bihar before he left Allahabad to visit his father for the second time. Jahāngīr says S͟harīf waited upon him fifteen days after his accession, and on 4th Rajab. This is another proof, if proof were needed, that the copyists have misread the opening sentence of the Tūzuk and have written has͟htam instead of bistam, for 4th Rajab is fifteen days after 20th Jumādā-l-āk͟hir. The Pāds͟hāhnāma and K͟hāfī K͟hān have 20th, and Price and Price’s original say that S͟harīf arrived sixteen days after the accession. [↑]
[31] I.O. MS. 181 and Muḥammad Hādī have Sult̤ān Nis̤ār Begam. K͟hāfī K͟hān, i, 245, has Sult̤ān Begam, and says she was born in 994. Price’s Jahāngīr, p. 20, says she was born a year before K͟husrau. She built a tomb for herself in the K͟husrau Bāg͟h, Allahabad, but she is not buried there (see J.R.A.S. for July, 1907, p. 607). She died on 4th S͟haʿbān, 1056 (5th September, 1646), and was at her own request buried in her grandfather’s tomb at Sikandra (Pāds͟hāhnāma, ii, 603–4). [↑]
[32] Should be S͟haik͟hāwaṭ. [↑]
[33] The R.A.S. and I.O. MSS. have here Umrā instead of Uzbegs. Umrā here stands, I think, for Umr Singh, the Rānā of Udaipūr, and the meaning is that S͟hīr K͟hān lost his arm in service against the Rānā. [↑]
[34] The point of the verse seems to be that light is regarded as something spread like a carpet on the ground, and that to place the foot upon it is to insult the sun. Compare Price, p. 33; but Manohar’s verse is wrongly translated there owing to a badly written MS. For Manohar see Akbarnāma, iii, 221, and Badayūnī, iii, 201, also Blochmann, p. 494, and his article in Calcutta Review for April, 1871, also the Dabistān, translation, ii, 53. [↑]
[35] Probably here āb means both water and the water of the sword. These lines are not in the R.A.S. or I.O. MSS. [↑]
[36] Text, iḥtiyāt̤ (caution); the MSS. have iʿtiqād (confidence), and I adopt this reading. [↑]
[37] Blochmann, p. 52. It was a small round seal. Ūzūk or ūzuk is a Tartar word meaning a ring, i.e. a signet-ring. [↑]
[38] Text, ṣabiyya (daughter), and this led Blochmann (p. 477, note 2) to say that if Sayyid Aḥmad’s text was correct Jahāngīr must have forgotten, in the number of his wives, which of them was the mother of Parwīz. As a fact, Sayyid Aḥmad’s text is not correct, though the R.A.S. MS. agrees with it. The two excellent I.O. MSS. have k͟hwīs͟h (relative), which is here equivalent to cousin. So also has the B.M. MS. used by Erskine. According to Muḥammad Hādī’s preface Parwīz’s mother was the daughter of K͟hwāja Ḥasan, the paternal uncle of Zain K͟hān Koka. His birth was in Muḥarram, 998, or 19th Ābān (November, 1589). See also Akbarnāma, iii, 568. [↑]
[39] I.e., both were Akbar’s foster-brothers. [↑]
[40] Price, p. 20, has Karmitty, and says the daughter only lived two months. Karamsī appears twice in the Akbarnāma as the name of a man; see Akbarnāma, ii, 261, and iii, 201. The name may mean ‘composed of kindness.’ The statement in Price is wrong. Bihār Bānū was married to T̤ahmuras̤ s. Prince Dāniyāl in his 20th year (see Tūzuk, M. Hādī’s continuation, p. 400). According to M. Hādī’s preface, Karamsī was the daughter of Rāja Kesho Dās Rāthor, and her daughter Bihār Bānū was born on 23rd S͟hahrīwar, 998 (September, 1590). Kesho Dās Rāṭhor is probably the Kesho Dās Mārū of the Tūzuk. [↑]
[41] Best known as Jodh Bāī (Blochmann, p. 619). [↑]
[42] It is extraordinary that Jahāngīr should have put S͟hāh-Jahān’s birth into A.H. 999. The I.O. MSS. support the text, but the R.A.S. MS. has A.H. 1000, which is without doubt right. Cf. Akbarnāma, Bib. Ind., iii, 603. Later on, a great point was made of his having been born in a millennium. The date is 5th January, 1592. [↑]
[43] Muḥammad Hādī says in his preface, p. 6, that S͟hāh-Jahān’s grandfather Akbar gave him the name of Sultan K͟hurram, ‘Prince Joy,’ because his birth made the world glad. It was noted that the child was born in the first millennium, and also that, like his father, he was born in the same month as the Prophet. [↑]
[44] Gladwin says they were twins, but this seems a mistake. They were both born about the time of Akbar’s death. [↑]
[45] In MS. No. 310 of Ethé’s Cat. of I.O. MSS. Saʿid K͟hān is described as giving as his reason for asking for M. G͟hāzī that he had adopted him as his son. Price’s Jahāngīr, p. 21, says the same thing. [↑]
[46] This should be Jān, and is so in I.O. MS. 181. [↑]
[47] See Maʾās̤iru-l-umarā, iii, 932. The meaning of the half and half is that the two men were made coadjutors. [↑]
[48] In R.A.S. and I.O. MSS. the following passage is a verse. See also Mr. Lowe’s translation, p. 16. [↑]
[49] Wird means ‘daily practice,’ and may be the word intended here. [↑]
[50] Cf. this with the fuller details in Price, p. 22. Following Blochmann, I take S͟hab-i-jumʿa to mean Thursday and not Friday night. [↑]
[51] The text has ʿAbdu-l-G͟hanī, but this, as the MSS. show and Blochmann has pointed out, is a mistake for ʿAbdu-n-Nabī. ʿAbdu-n-Nabī was strangled, and the common report is that this was done by Abū-l-faẓl. If this be true it is rather surprising that Jahāngīr does not mention it as an excuse for killing Abū-l-faẓl. Cf. the account of Mīrān Ṣadr Jahān in Price, p. 24. The “Forty Sayings” is a book by Jāmī. See Rieu, Cat. i, 17, and also Dr. Herbelot s.v. Arbain. [↑]
[52] This should be G͟hiyās̤ Beg. He was father of Nūrjahān. According to the Maʾās̤iru-l-umarā (i, 129), he was commander of 1,000 under Akbar. [↑]
[53] Topk͟hāna-i-rikāb, lit. stirrup-arsenal. It means light artillery that could accompany royal progresses. See Bernier, and Irvine, A. of M., 134. [↑]
[54] Text, topchī, which seems properly to mean a gunner, but the number is preposterous. Cf. Blochmann, p. 470, and Price, p. 28. Price’s original has 6,000 topchī mounted on camels, and has pāytak͟ht, i.e. the capital. Erskine has “To have always in readiness in the arsenal arms, and accoutrements for 50,000 matchlock men.” This seems reasonable, for even if Jahāngīr ordered 50,000 musketeers, he would not have required them to be kept in the arsenal. It seems to me that though chī in Turkī is the sign of the agent (nomen agentis) it is occasionally used by Indian writers as a diminutive. Thus topchī here probably means a small gun or a musket, and in Hindustani we are familiar with the word chilamchī, which means a small basin. At p. 301 of the Tūzuk, four lines from foot, we have the word īlchī, which commonly means an ambassador—an agent of a people—used certainly not in this sense, and apparently to mean a number of horses. It is, however, doubtful if īlchī here be the true reading. [↑]
[55] Text, aknūn (now), which is a mistake for altūn (gold). See Elliot and Dowson, vi, 288. Āl is vermilion in Turkī and altūn gold. Jahāngīr means that he changed the name from āl tamg͟hā to altūn tamg͟hā. [↑]
[56] Mīrzā Sult̤ān was great-grandson of Sulaimān. [↑]
[57] Perhaps the reference is to the boy’s own father. He was alive at this time, and Akbar was not. [↑]
[58] This is the man who afterwards rebelled and made Jahāngīr his prisoner. [↑]
[59] Text, ulūs-i-Dihli. Blochmann (p. 482 n.) points out that this is a very doubtful term, as Mīrzā ʿAlī came from Badakhshan. On examining three MSS. of the Tūzuk-i-Jahāngīrī I find no word Dihli, but the words īn ulūs, ‘this tribe or family,’ and I think this must be the correct reading, and refers to the Timurides. The same phrase occurs at text, p. 173. Blochmann suggests to read Dūldāy for Dihli, but I think it more probable that the word Dihli should be ʿālī. Mīrzā ʿAlī was styled Akbars͟hāhī, and no doubt this is why Jahāngīr writes īn ulūs or ulūs-i-ʿālī. Mīrzā ʿAlī is often mentioned in the Akbarnāma in connection with the wars in the Deccan, and is generally called Akbars͟hāhī, e.g. at p. 702. For an account of his pathetic death see Blochmann, l.c., the Maʾās̤iru-l-umarā, iii, 357, and the text, p. 163. [↑]
[60] The MSS. have a different reading, “If a king seize country and climes,” etc. [↑]
[61] S͟hāhruk͟h was married to Jahāngīr’s half-sister, S͟hakaru-n-nisā. He was a Timurid. [↑]
[62] The MSS. have Abū-l-walī, and this seems more likely. [↑]
[63] The MSS. have Bhīnā, and Price’s original seems also to have Bhīnā. Muqarrab did not return for about seven months, as this entry could not have been made till then. See p. 35 of Persian text of Tūzuk. [↑]
[64] Text, Suk͟hunān-i-past u buland. Cf. Steingass, s.v. past. Words gentle and severe seem meant. [↑]
[65] See Blochmann, p. 447. He is mentioned by Du Jarric as disputing with the Catholic priests before Jahāngīr (see J.A.S.B. for 1896, p. 77). According to Badayūnī, iii, 98, it was Naqīb’s father, ʿAbdu-l-Lat̤īf, with whom Akbar read (see Akbarnāma, ii, 19). ʿAbdu-l-Lat̤īf and his family arrived in 963 (1556). Erskine understands Jahāngīr’s remark to mean that Naqīb was his (Jahāngīr’s) teacher, but probably Jahāngīr means that it was Naqīb’s father who taught Akbar, or he has confounded the father and son. As Naqīb lived till 1023 (1614), he would probably be too young in 1556 to have been Akbar’s teacher. [↑]
[66] Mān Singh was the adopted son of Bhagwān Dās, and it would appear from this passage that he was his nephew also. [↑]
[67] The MSS. have Ḥātim s. Bābūī Manglī, and this is right. See Blochmann, p. 370, n. i, and p. 473. [↑]
[68] The MSS. have S͟hāhwār. [↑]
[69] I.O. MSS. have Abū-l-walī. He was an Ūzbeg, and received the title of Bahādur K͟hān. See Ma ās̤iru-l-umarā, i, 400, and Akbarnāma, iii, 820 and 839, where he is called Abū-l-Baqā. The real name seems to be Abūl Be or Bey, and this is how Erskine writes the name. [↑]
[70] The text seems corrupt. The I.O. MSS. say nothing about Shiraz, but merely that Ḥusain Jāmī was a disciple who had a dervish character (sīrat); nor does the R.A.S. MS. mention Shiraz. [↑]
[71] That is, descended from the famous Central Asian saint K͟hwāja Aḥrār. [↑]
[72] Something seems to have fallen out of the text and MSS., for this passage is obscure and not connected with the context. It is clearer in Price’s version, where it is brought in as part of Jahāngīr’s statements about promotions, and where (p. 40) we read as follows:—“I shall now return to the more grateful subject of recording rewards and advancements.... On K͟hwāja Zakariyyā, the son of K͟hwāja Muḥammad Yaḥyā, although in disgrace, I conferred the rank of 500. This I was induced to do on the recommendation of the venerated S͟haik͟h Ḥusain Jāmī. Six months previous to my accession,” etc. Evidently the statement about Zakariyyā’s promotion has been omitted accidentally from the Tūzuk. There is a reference to the S͟haik͟h’s dream in Muḥammad Hādī’s preface to the Tūzuk (p. 15). He says there that it was the saint Bahāʾu-l-ḥaqq who appeared in a dream to Ḥusain Jāmī and told him that Sult̤ān Salīm would soon be king. [↑]
[73] I.e. of Furj or Furg in Persia. But Furjī is a mistake for Qūrchī (belonging to the body-guard). He was a Mogul. See Blochmann, p. 457. [↑]
[74] Text has wrongly Pak͟hta. See Blochmann, p. 469. He received the title of Sardār K͟hān. [↑]
[75] Should be Namakīn. See Blochmann, p. 199. [↑]
[76] This passage has been translated by Elliot (vi, 289). See also Price (p. 44), where the discussion is fuller. [↑]
[77] Jahāngīr’s idea is somewhat vaguely expressed, but his meaning seems to be that the ten incarnations do not illustrate any attribute of God, for there have been men who performed similar wonders. The corresponding passage in the text used by Major Price is differently rendered by him, but his version is avowedly a paraphrase, and it appears incorrect in this passage. [↑]
[78] Literally, “of the How and the Why.” [↑]
[79] Text, s͟hīr-andām, ‘tiger-shaped,’ which I think means thin in the flank (see Steingass, s.v.). I have taken the translation of the words malāḥat and ṣabāḥat from Elliot. See his note vi, 376, where the two words seem wrongly spelt. [↑]
[80] Erskine has “Let Sulaimān place his ring on his finger.” [↑]
[81] Price translates—
“In pleasure of the chase with thee, my soul breathes fresh and clear;
But who receives thy fatal dart, sinks lifeless on his bier.”
[82] Perhaps referring to the name which Dāniyāl gave to his gun, and which recoiled on himself, but the MSS. and text have nagīrad, and not bagīrad. [↑]
[83] The MSS. have S͟hakar-nis̤ār, ‘sugar-sprinkling.’ She lived into S͟hāh-Jahān’s reign. [↑]
[84] She died unmarried in Jahāngīr’s reign. [↑]
[85] This must, I think, be the meaning, though according to the wording the statement would seem to be that there is no room for Shias except in Persia. Erskine has “None but Shias are tolerated in Persia, Sunnis in Rūm and Tūrān, and Hindus in Hindustan.” [↑]
[86] Kings are regarded as shadows of God. [↑]
[87] The chronogram is one year short, yielding 962 instead of 963. [↑]
[88] According to the T̤abaqāt, Elliot, v, 366, what the Mīrzā said was “Where are the elephants?” [↑]
[89] The word for ‘face-guard’ is pīsh-rūy (front-face), and Jahāngīr makes his father pun upon the word, saying, “It has loosed (opened) my front-face.” Cf. Price, p. 54. [↑]
[90] ‘The helper.’ This is an allusion to Akbar’s patron saint, Muʿīnu-d-dīn Chiṣhtī, whose name he adopted as his battle-cry. [↑]
[91] The reading in the lithograph seems wrong; the MSS. have az bāzīcha, ‘in jest.’ [↑]
[92] Abū-l-faẓl is more moderate; he says (Blochmann, p. 116) that Akbar killed 1,019 animals with Sangrām. [↑]
[93] Blochmann says, of Mashhad, p. 381. [↑]
[94] The furriery. See Blochmann, pp. 87 n. and 616. Kurk means ‘fur’ in Turki. [↑]
[95] The word yātish is omitted in text, but occurs in the MSS. [↑]
[96] Ḥājī Koka was sister of Saʿādat Yār Koka (Akbar-nāma, iii, 656). According to Price this passage refers to a widows’ fund. [↑]
[97] This was one of Akbar’s regulations (Blochmann p. 142). The amount was ten dams on each muhr of the horse’s value, calculated on an increase of 50 per cent. See also Price, p. 61. [↑]
[98] This passage is not clear, but the peculiarity to which attention is drawn seems rather the prominent forehead than the oozing fluid. Price (p. 62) has a fuller account of this elephant. [↑]
[99] See Blochmann, pp. 176, 452, and the very full account of him in the Maʾās̤ir, iii, 285. Amul is an old city south of the Caspian and west of Astrabad. [↑]
[100] She was Akbar’s first and principal wife, but bore him no children. She long survived him. [↑]
[101] These are the opening lines of an ode of Ḥāfiz̤. [↑]
[102] Maʾās̤iru-l-umarā. Yatīm instead of Pīm or Bīm. See Blochmann, p. 470. Erskine has Saīn Bahādur. [↑]
[104] I think Jahāngīr means that though the K͟hān was an excellent servant in his own line, he was hardly fit for the command of 2,000 or for the title of K͟hān. Cf. his praise of him at p. 71 (Blochmann, p. 498). He was called Pīs͟hrau probably from his going on ahead with the advance camp, as being in charge of the carpets, etc., as well as because of his personal activity. [↑]
[105] In Price’s Jahāngīr, p. 15, Jahāngīr states that he had imprisoned K͟husrau in the upper part of the royal tower in the castle of Agra. It from this confinement that K͟husrau escaped. [↑]
[106] Du Jarric says it was in this way that he was allowed to pass the sentinels. Du Jarric gives the date of K͟husrau’s flight as 15th April, 1606 (this would be New Style). By Sunday night is meant Saturday evening. Sunday was Akbar’s birthday. [↑]
[107] Elliot (vii, 292) makes the Amīru-l-umarā envious of his peers, and Jahāngīr apprehensive lest he should destroy K͟husrau, but he had just told him that nothing he did against K͟husrau would be wrong. Clearly Jahāngīr’s fear was that his favourite should be destroyed by K͟husrau, or perhaps by the Amīr’s treacherous associates. [↑]
[108] The text has a curious mistake here: instead of ba Kābul it has bakāwal (‘superintendent of the kitchen’) as part of Dūst Muḥammad’s name. Dūst was not bakāwal, but held higher office, and was later put in charge of the fort of Agra and given the title of K͟hwāja Jahān. [↑]
[110] According to K͟hāfī K͟hān (i, 250) he was put to death, unless the expression “claws of death” is merely rhetorical. The Maʾās̤ir (iii, 334) says he was imprisoned. [↑]
[111] The above obscure passage is explained in Price, p. 69. [↑]
[112] Elliot (vi, 293) observes that this is a very involved and obscure passage. [↑]
[114] The word tiryāq means both opium and antidote. [↑]
[115] Blochmann, relying on K͟hāfi K͟hān, puts her death in 1011, and the Akbar-nāma (iii, 826) puts it in 1012. The chronogram in the K͟husrau Bāg͟h yields 1012. See J.R.A.S. for July, 1907, p. 604. [↑]
[116] Where Lord Bellomont died in 1656. See Manucci (Irvine), i, 71. [↑]
[117] Probably this means the grandsons. At p. 329 it is mentioned that the grandsons had been confined in Gwalior up to the 16th year. [↑]
[119] Narela is said to be 15½ miles north-west of Delhi. William Finch, in his itinerary, mentions the stage as Nalera, a name that corresponds with Jahāngīr’s. [↑]
[120] 53 miles north of Delhi. [↑]
[121] Instead of tāza the MSS. have pāra, and the meaning seems to be that he accompanied K͟husrau for some distance. In Price’s Jahāngīr (p. 81) it is said that Niz̤ām received 6,000 rupees. [↑]
[122] This is an interesting passage, because it is Jahāngīr’s account of his father’s ‘Divine Faith.’ But it is obscure, and copyists seem to have made mistakes. It is explained somewhat by the MS. used by Price (trans., pp. 82, 83), where more details are given than in the text. It is there stated that Aḥmad was Mīr-i-ʿAdl of Jahāngīr before the latter’s accession. [↑]
[123] The text has dast u sīna (hand and bosom), but the correct words, as is shown in the I.O. MS., No. 181, are s͟hast u s͟habiha or s͟habah, and these refer to the ring or token and the portrait given by Akbar to the followers of the ‘Divine Faith.’ See Blochmann, pp. 166 n. and 203; and Badayūnī, ii, 338. Aḥmad appears to be the Aḥmad Sūfī of Blochmann, pp. 208, 209, and of Badayūnī, ii, 404, and Lowe, p. 418. He was a member of the ‘Divine Faith.’ [↑]
[124] Text, pūj or pūch, but the manuscript reading lūk is preferable. Erskine’s MS. has lūj, naked. [↑]
[125] Price (p. 83) has Anand or Anwand. Apparently Alūwa is right; it is a place 18 miles north-west of Umballa. Cf. “India under Aurangzib,” by J. N. Sarkar. [↑]
[126] Abū-l-Bey, the Abū-l-Baqā of Akbar-nāma, iii, 820. [↑]
[127] A member of the ‘Divine Faith’ (Blochmann, p. 452, etc.). [↑]
[128] The text has qatl by mistake for qabl. [↑]
[129] Biryānī. See Blochmann, p. 60. [↑]
[130] The Gundvāl of Tiefenthaler, i, 113. Cunningham, in his history of the Sikhs, spells it Goīndwāl. It is on the Beas. [↑]
[131] The text has singhāsan instead of sukhāsan. Kāmgāar Ḥusainī has sukhpāl. [↑]
[132] Instead of the basūzānād of the text, the MSS. have bas͟hūrānad, he defiles. In the last line they have jāy instead of tak͟ht. [↑]
[133] I.e. the place to which to turn in prayer. [↑]
[134] Elliot (vi, 299) has Jahān, and the word in the MSS. does not look like Jaipāl. [↑]
[135] This word appears to be a mistake; it is not in the MSS. [↑]
[136] When the boat stuck, the boatmen swam ashore, and it was probably then that Ḥusain shot at them. See Blochmann, p. 414, n. 2. [↑]
[137] “With a chain fastened from his left hand to his left foot, according to the law of Chingīz K͟hān” (Gladwin’s Jahāngīr, quoted by Elliot, vi, 507). But apparently what is meant is that K͟husrau was led up from the left side of the emperor. [↑]
[138] Du Jarric, in his history of the Jesuit Missions, gives some details about the punishment. The bullock and ass were slaughtered on the spot and their skins were sewed on the bodies of the unhappy men. Horns and ears were left on the skins. [↑]
[139] Perhaps the meaning is that the weather was bad. [↑]
[140] The proper form seems to be Bhaironwāl, the Bhyrowal of the maps. It is on the right bank of the Bīāh (Beas) on the road from Jalandhar to Amritsar. See Blochmann, p. 414, note. [↑]
[141] The words are omitted in the text. Erskine read in his MS. gāu jizwan, which I do not understand. The I.O. MSS. and B.M. MS. Or 3276 have gāwān u k͟harān. Ḥusain Beg, whose proper name was Ḥasan, was a brave soldier, and did good service under Akbar. See his biography in Blochmann, p. 454. [↑]
[142] The fifth Gūrū of the Sikhs and the compiler of the Granth. He was the father of Har Govind. See Sayyid Muhammad Lat̤īf’s history of the Punjāb, p. 253. Arjun’s tomb is in Lahore. [↑]
[143] But qas͟hqa is a Turkish word. The Hindi phrase seems to be ṭīkā. [↑]
[144] The cousin of Moses, famous for his wealth; the Korah of the Bible. [↑]
[147] Akbar-nāma, iii, 748, and Blochmann, p. 546. He was a man of piety and learning, and Jahāngīr means that he restored him to his former quiet life. The arbāb-i-saʿādat, or auspicious persons, were those who offered up prayers for the king’s prosperity and other blessings. [↑]
[148] Amba was killed later by Nūr-Jahān’s husband, Shīr-Afgan (Tūzuk, pp. 54, 55). [↑]
[150] These words are not in the MSS., and they seem to have crept into the text by mistake and to be a premature entry of words relating to Hās͟him, etc. The brother of the former ruler (or king) of K͟handesh could hardly be a k͟hānazād. [↑]
[151] This should be, according to the MSS., “army against the Rānā,” not army of the Deccan. [↑]
[152] The MSS. have “in the neighbourhood of Lahore.” Parwīz had then charge of Bihar. [↑]
[153] Text, wrongly, Bahman. Jahāngīr was born on the 21st of S͟hahrīwar. [↑]
[154] Apparently, had long looked forward to the happy day when Jahāngīr should be weighed as a king. [↑]
[155] Perhaps the meaning is that he was introduced along with Dāniyāl’s children. [↑]
[157] This refers to his parentage. [↑]
[158] In the MSS. this name seems to be Bhīm Mal. Manjholi is written Manjholah in Blochmann, p. 175. [↑]
[159] ? Nandanpur. These places are in Sindsagār, near Multān. [↑]
[160] MS. 181 has Bahar, and it has 600 instead of 800 horse. [↑]
[161] Text, Ūymāq pūrī (?). MS. 181 has būrī, and 305 seems to have the same. Can it mean ‘red cavalry’? As Blochmann has pointed out, 371, n. 2, the word Ūymāq does not always mean the tribe, but was used to denote a superior kind of cavalry. [↑]
[162] The qamargāh or ring-hunt produced 265 head of game; the rest were shot at other times; the total of the list should be apparently 576. [↑]