[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. [↑]