Verse.
Nūru-d-dīn S͟hāh Jahāngīr s. S͟hāh Akbar
Is a king who in the Age hath no equal.
He took Fort Kāngṛa by the aid of God.
A drop from the cloud of his sword is a tempest.
As by his order this illumined mosque was built,
May his forehead shine by his prostration.
A hidden messenger said: “In seeking for the date
(Say) The mosque of S͟hāh Jahāngīr was illumined.”[72]
On the first of the Divine month of Isfandārmuẕ I gave the establishment and everything belonging to the government and Amirship of Iʿtimādu-d-daula to Nūr Jahān Begam, and ordered that her drums and orchestra should be sounded after those of the king. On the 4th of the same month I pitched in the neighbourhood of the pargana of Kas͟hhūna.[73] On this day K͟hwāja Abū-l-Ḥasan was raised to the lofty dignity of supreme Diwan. I conferred dresses of honour on 32 individuals of the Deccan Amirs. Abū Saʿīd, grandson of Iʿtimādu-d-daula, was raised to the mansab of 1,000 personal and 500 horse. At this time a report came from K͟hurram that K͟husrau, on the 8th[74] (20th) of the month, had died of the disease of colic pains (qūlanj), and gone to the mercy of God.
On the 19th of the month I pitched on the bank of the Bihat (Jhelam). Qāsim K. was raised to the mansab of 3,000 personal and 2,000 horse. Rāja Kis͟han Dās was selected for the duty of faujdār of Delhi, and his mansab was fixed at 2,000 personal and 500 horse, original and increased. Previously to this, huntsmen and yasāwulān (guards) had been ordered to prepare a jarga (hunting-ring) in the s͟hikār-gāh (hunting-place of) Girjhāk. When it was reported to me that they had brought the game into the enclosure, on the 24th of the month I went out to hunt with some of my special servants. Of hill quchqār (rams?) and gazelles 124[75] head were taken. On this day it was reported that Z̤afar K. s. Zain K., had died. I promoted Saʿādat Umīd, his son, to the mansab of 800 personal and 400 horse.
[1] The I.O. MSS. have “Saturday.” But Monday seems right, as Thursday was 4 Farwardīn. [↑]
[2] In the Āyīn, which was composed in the 40th year of Akbar’s reign, Salīm’s rank is given as 10,000, Murād’s as 8,000, and Dāniyāl’s as 7,000 (p. 308). [↑]
[3] In celebration of the commencement of the 16th year of the reign. [↑]
[4] Yāqūt-i-kabūd, “a blue ruby.” [↑]
[5] The I.O. MSS. have Mīrzā Muḥammad. [↑]
[6] Jamālu-d-dīn Ḥusain Injū. [↑]
[7] See Vullers, s.v. It is a smelling-bottle or case containing ambergris. [↑]
[9] Apparently a zebra. See Iqbāl-nāma, 179, where it is stated that it was brought by sea. The text of the Tūzuk is wrong, as usual. What we should read is: “It was like a tiger (MS. 181 and Iqbāl-nāma have s͟hīr, not babar), but the markings on a tiger are black and yellow, and these were black and white.” [↑]
[10] Perhaps this is the muhar now in Germany. [↑]
[13] Thursday night or Friday eve is what is meant. [↑]
[15] King David was said to be a maker of cuirasses. [↑]
[16] Yamānī. Elliot has almāsī (adamant-like). [↑]
[17] See Blochmann’s translation and remarks in Proceedings A.S.B. for 1869, p. 167. It is there stated that the date of the fall of the meteorite was Friday, April 10, 1621, O.S., and that the weight would be nearly 5.271 pounds troy. [↑]
[18] A widow of Bāqī Muḥammad. [↑]
[20] Elliot, VI. 379, has “in sight of the fort.” Perhaps the meaning is that the villages were in the jurisdiction of the fort. [↑]
[21] The Iqbāl-nāma, 181, has “fourteen.” [↑]
[22] The account of S͟hāh Jahān’s spirited attack on the Deccanis is in some places rather obscurely worded, and the printed edition is not always correct. Help can be obtained from the Iqbāl-nāma, 181, etc., and from Elliot, VI. 379. The text has firār, “flight,” and this has been followed by Elliot, who has “on their approach the rebels took to flight, and removed to a distance from Burhanpur.” But the true reading, as shown by the Iqbāl-nāma, is qarār, “firmness,” not firār, and the words are bar daur-i-s͟hahr, “round the city,” not bar dūr, “far from.” The rebels were, as the Iqbāl-nāma states, “in the environs of the city,” “dar sawād-i-s͟hahr,” but apparently not in such force as to prevent S͟hāh Jahān’s sazāwuls—i.e., his apparitors and summoners—from going into the city and bringing out recruits. [↑]
[23] In the I.O. MSS. the word looks like bī-jāgarī (want of settled home or residence?). [↑]
[24] Text has chasa. The word may be jus͟hs͟ha, given in Vullers, 516b, as meaning robes or garments, and this is the meaning given to it by Elliot, but the Iqbāl-nāma has jubba, “cuirasses,” and this I have adopted. It is jubba in I.O. No. 181. [↑]
[25] Text, chihlā u k͟hamcha. The last word should, I think, be jamjama. Chihlā in Hindustani means a “slimy place.” It is jamjama in I.O. MS., No. 181. [↑]
[26] Text has ghair instead of ʿAmbar. [↑]
[27] Text wrongly has Rūp-ratan. [↑]
[28] Pādis͟hāh-nāma, I., Part II., p. 349. [↑]
[29] The text wrongly has 1,000. [↑]
[30] The Bib. Ind. ed. of Iqbāl-nāma, 184, inserts a negative here, but this seems wrong. In a MS. in my possession there is no negative. [↑]
[32] Elliot, VI. 448, the Maʾās̤iru-l-Umarā, I. 577, and Pādis͟hāh-nāma I., Part II., 347. [↑]
[33] Text wrongly has 12th. Jahāngīr’s birthday was on the 18th S͟hahrīwar. [↑]
[34] K͟hiffatī. I am not sure of the reading. One B.M. MS. seems to have ḥaqqī, and perhaps the meaning is that the physicians had already been abundantly recompensed for their labour for two or three days, ḥaqqī being taken as equal to ḥaqq-i-saʿī. [↑]
[35] A little before his weight came only to Rs. 6,500 (p. 329 of text). But possibly Jahāngīr means that he had himself weighed for Jotik’s benefit. [↑]
[38] Text and MSS. have mādar-i-ūrā, “her mother”(?) Perhaps we should read mā ūrā, “we (esteemed) her not less than our own mother.” Or it may be that the “her” means Nūr Jahān, and that Jahāngīr means he esteemed his mother-in-law as much as his own mother. [↑]
[39] That is, S͟hāh Jahān (see Iqbāl-nāma, 186). [↑]
[40] The MSS. seem to have K͟hostī—i.e., of K͟host. [↑]
[41] Text 8th, but should be 20th. [↑]
[42] Alwanū in MSS. It appears to be Aluwa, 11m. S.-E. of Sirhind. [↑]
[43] Text pahangī, which seems unintelligible. The MSS. have māhīki(?)-i-k͟hūrd, “a small fish.” [↑]
[45] Founded by Nūr Jahān (see Cunningham, “Archæological Reports,” XIV. 62). [↑]
[47] I have translated this passage from the MSS., which differ a good deal from the text. Talwāra was in the Bārī Dūʾāb Sarkār (Jarrett, II. 318.) [↑]
[48] Apparently this is the pulpaikar of Bābar (Erskine, 320), though the two descriptions do not altogether agree. Perhaps it is a hornbill. [↑]
[49] The MSS. have sal and lūt. Is it the s͟hām of Bābar? (Erskine, 320). [↑]
[50] Murg͟h-i-zarīn, goldfinch or golden oriole (?). [↑]
[51] The date and month are not mentioned, but it appears from the Iqbāl-nāma, which gives the next entry as 14 Bahman, that the month was Bahman, and that the date was probably about 20 January, 1622. [↑]
[52] The Bhalon of Jarrett, II. 316. Sībah is mentioned at p. 317, ibid. The text has Sītā. [↑]
[53] The couplet comes from Budags’s elegy on Abū-l-Ḥasan Nahid Balk͟hi. See Aufi’s Lababu-l-Albab. Browne’s ed., Part II., p. 3. [↑]
[54] Text wrongly has Chītā. Chamba is N.-W. of Kāngṛa. [↑]
[56] The fort was destroyed by the earthquake of 1905 (I.G., XIV. 397). Presumably Jahāngīr’s mosque was also destroyed then. [↑]
[57] The breadth of the second tank is not mentioned in the MSS. [↑]
[58] “The present temple of Bajreswari Devi is at Bhawan, a suburb of Kāngṛa” (I.G., XIV. 386). [↑]
[59] See I.G., XIV. 86, and Jarrett, II. 314 and n. 1. Jarrett states that Jwālā Mukhī is two days’ journey from Kāngṛa. Apparently Jahāngīr took his statement from the Āyīn, which has the words “in the vicinity” (Jarrett, ibid.). Jarrett’s statement that Jwālā Mukhī is two days’ journey from Kāngṛa is taken from Tieffenthaler, I. 108. Tieffenthaler adds that the distance is 14 to 15 milles (leagues, or kosses). He speaks of the Fort of Kāngṛa as being only one-fourth of a mille in circumference. The image, he states, was that of Bhowani, and represented the lower part of the goddess’s body. The head was alleged to be at Jwālā Mukhī. [↑]
[60] I.e., know the physical cause of the flame. The MSS. do not mention Hindus in this clause. [↑]
[61] See Jarrett, II. 313, and note 2. [↑]
[62] The temple was sacked by Maḥmūd of G͟haznīn. [↑]
[63] This might be Koh-i-Mandār, the hill which was used as a churning-stick by the gods. There is a hill of this name in Bhagalpur district which is known as Mandārgirī. But probably Kūh-i-Madār here means the centre-hill, for in the Bib. Ind. text of the Āyīn-i-Akbarī, I. 538, two lines from foot, it is said that the place is called Jālandharī, and a note (7) gives the various reading, “this spot is regarded as the centre,” “sar-i-zamīn-rā madār pindārand.” Apparently it is regarded as the central place because the breast fell here, Jarrett, II. 314, n. According to the list given there the right breast fell at Jālandhara and the tongue at Jwālā Mukhī. [↑]
[64] I.G., new ed., XIX. 232. [↑]
[65] Podna, or būdana. The quail. [↑]
[66] Text k͟hirdas͟h, which I presume is a mistake for k͟hurūs. [↑]
[67] Dhameri. See I.G., XIX. 232. [↑]
[68] Mautī might mean “dead,” but probably the word means “Pearl,” and was the title assumed by a tribe or family among the Sannyāsīs. See infra. The statement that this order put themselves into the figure of a cross doubtless means that they belong to the Urdu bāhū (arms-aloft) sect—i.e., the sect who raise their arms above their heads, in the figure of a cross. In Tavernier, II. 378, of ed. of 1676, this is the 8th posture of ascetics, and at that page and at 376 there are figures of such ascetics. The I.O. MSS. have salab, “mourning,” instead of ṣalb. [↑]
[69] Sarva vāsī means “all-abiding.” Perhaps the word should be Sarva nāsī, “all-destroying.” [↑]
[70] For taslīm, see Hughes’ Dict. of Islam. Possibly we should read taṣlīb, “make the sign of the cross.” [↑]
[71] The chronogram of the taking of the fort yields 1029, and that of the building of the mosque 1031. [↑]
[72] Nūrānī, “illumined,” an allusion to Jahāngīr’s name. [↑]
[73] The MSS. have Kahtūma apparently. ? Kahūta in Rāwalpindī district. [↑]
[74] This should be, I think, the 20th, and though the name of the month is not given, it should be Bahman. See MSS. and Iqbālnāma, 191. K͟husrau died in the Deccan, and presumably at Burhanpur or Āsīr. 20 Bahman, 1031, corresponds to January 29, 1622, O.S. But the date of his death has not been quite determined. See J.R.A.S. for 1907, p. 601. [↑]
[75] The I.O. MSS. have 121 instead of 124, and they add to the information about Z̤afar K. that he died in Ghaznin. They also give his son’s name as Saʿādatu-llah. The Iqbāl-nāma, p. 191, has 121 hill sheep, mārk͟hūr and deer. [↑]