[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. [↑]