The Bābur-nāma in English (Memoirs of Bābur)

by Emperor of Hindustan Babur · English · Gutenberg #44608 · 2,638,595 chars · public domain (US)

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Bābur-nāma in English (Memoirs of Bābur)

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: The Bābur-nāma in English (Memoirs of Bābur)

Author: Emperor of Hindustan Babur

Translator: Annette Susannah Beveridge

Release date: January 7, 2014 [eBook #44608]
Most recently updated: October 23, 2024

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/44608

Credits: E-text prepared by Barbara Tozier, Turgut Dincer, Bill Tozier, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BĀBUR-NĀMA IN ENGLISH (MEMOIRS OF BĀBUR) ***

Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this
file which includes the original illustrations.
See 44608-h.htm or 44608-h.zip:
(https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/44608/pg44608-images.html)
or
(https://www.gutenberg.org/files/44608/44608-h.zip)

+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Transcriber's note: |
| |
| Many Turki, Arabic and Persian names have various spellings |
| in the text. There are about 700 occurrences of hyphenated |
| unhyphenated and spaced words. Correcting those for the |
| sake of consistency would be risky in many cases and would |
| mean a major change in the printed text which already has |
| many typographical errors. |
| |
| Two wide tables have been split into narrower sections. |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+

THE BĀBUR-NĀMA IN ENGLISH

(MEMOIRS OF BĀBUR).

Translated from the original Turki Text of

Z̤ahiru'd-dīn Muḥammad Bābur Pādshāh _Ghāzī_

Annette Susannah Beveridge

First Printed 1922

[Illustration:

_This work

is dedicate to

Bābur's

fame._]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE: Introductory.—Cap. I. Babur's exemplars in the
Arts of peace, p. xxvii.—Cap. II. Problems of the mutilated
Babur-nama, p. xxxi.—Cap. III. The Turki MSS. and
work connecting with them, p. xxxviii.—Cap. IV.
The Leyden and Erskine "Memoirs of Baber", p. lvii.—Postscript
of Thanks, p. lx.

SECTION I.—FARGHĀNA

899 AH.—Oct. 12th 1493 to Oct. 2nd 1494 AD.—Bābur's age at
the date of his accession—+Description of Farghāna+
(pp. 1 to 12)—Death and biography of `Umar Shaikh
(13 to 19 and 24 to 28)—Biography of Yūnas _Chaghatāī_
(18 to 24)—Bābur's uncles Aḥmad _Mīrān-shāhī_ and
Maḥmūd _Chaghatāī_ (The Khān) invade Farghāna—Death
and biography of Aḥmad—Misdoings of his successor, his
brother Maḥmūd 1-42

900 AH.—Oct. 2nd 1494 to Sep. 21st 1495 AD.—Invasion of
Farghāna continued—Bābur's adoption of orthodox
observance—Death and biography of Maḥmūd
_Mīrān-shāhī_—Samarkand affairs—revolt of Ibrāhīm _Sārū_
defeated—Bābur visits The Khān in Tāshkīnt—tribute collected
from the Jīgrak tribe—expedition into Aūrātīpā 43-56

901 AH.—Sep. 21st 1495 to Sep. 9th 1496 AD.—Ḥusain
_Bāī-qarā's_ campaign against Khusrau Shāh—Bābur receives
Aūzbeg sulṯāns—Revolt of the Tarkhāns in Samarkand—Bābur's
first move for Samarkand 57-64

902 AH.—Sep. 9th 1496 to Aug. 30th 1497 AD.—Bābur's second
move for Samarkand—Dissensions of Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ and
his sons—Dissensions between Khusrau Shāh and Mas`ūd
_Mīrān-shāhī_ 65-71

903 AH.—Aug. 30th 1497 to Aug. 19th 1498 AD.—Bābur's
second attempt on Samarkand is successful—+Description
of Samarkand+ (pp. 74 to 86)—his action there—Mughūls
demand and besiege Andijān for Bābur's half-brother
Jahāngīr—his mother and friends entreat his help—he
leaves Samarkand in his cousin `Alī's hands—has a relapse
of illness on the road and is believed dying—on the news
Andijān is surrendered by a Mughūl to the Mughūl faction—Having
lost Samarkand and Andijān, Bābur is hospitably
entertained by the Khujandīs—he is forced to dismiss
Khalīfa—The Khān (his uncle) moves to help him but is
persuaded to retire—many followers go to Andijān where
were their families—he is left with 200-300 men—his
mother and grandmother and the families of his men sent
to him in Khujand—he is distressed to tears—The Khān
gives help against Samarkand but his troops turn back on
news of Shaibānī—Bābur returns to Khujand—speaks of
his ambition to rule—goes in person to ask The Khān's
help to regain Andijān—his force being insufficient, he
goes back to Khujand—Affairs of Khusrau Shāh and the
Tīmūrid Mīrzās—Affairs of Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ and his
sons—Khusrau Shāh blinds Bābur's cousin Mas`ūd—Bābur
curses the criminal 72-96

904 AH.—Aug. 19th 1498 to Aug. 8th 1499 AD.—Bābur borrows
Pashāghar for the winter and leaves Khujand—rides 70-80
miles with fever—a winter's tug-of-war with Samarkand—his
force insufficient, he goes back to Khujand—unwilling
to burthen it longer, goes into the summer-pastures of
Aūrātīpā—invited to Marghīnān by his mother's uncle
`Alī-dost—a joyful rush over some 145 miles—near
Marghīnān prudent anxieties arise and are stilled—he is
admitted to Marghīnān on terms—is attacked vainly by
the Mughūl faction—accretions to his force—helped by
The Khān—the Mughūls defeated near Akhsī—Andijān
recovered—Mughūls renew revolt—Bābur's troops beaten
by Mughūls—Taṃbal attempts Andijān 97-107

905 AH.—Aug. 8th 1499 to July 28th 1500 AD.—Bābur's campaign
against Ahmad _Taṃbal_ and the Mughūl faction—he takes
Māzū—Khusrau Shāh murders Bāī-sunghar _Mīrānshāhī_—Biography
of the Mīrzā—Bābur wins his first ranged battle, from Taṃbal
supporting Jahāngīr, at Khūbān—winter-quarters—minor
successes—the winter-camp broken up by Qaṃbar-i-`alī's taking
leave—Bābur returns to Andijān—The Khān persuaded by Taṃbal's
kinsmen in his service to support Jahāngīr—his troops retire
before Bābur—Bābur and Taṃbal again opposed—Qaṃbar-i-`alī
again gives trouble—minor action and an accommodation made
without Bābur's wish—terms of the accommodation—The
self-aggrandizement of `Alī-dost _Mughūl_—Bābur's first
marriage—a personal episode—Samarkand affairs—`Alī quarrels
with the Tarkhāns—The Khān sends troops against
Samarkand—Mīrzā Khān invited there by a Tarkhān—`Alī defeats
The Khān's Mughūls—Bābur invited to Samarkand—prepares to
start and gives Jahāngīr rendezvous for the attempt—Taṃbal's
brother takes Aūsh—Bābur leaves this lesser matter aside and
marches for Samarkand—Qaṃbar-i-`alī punishes himself—Shaibānī
reported to be moving on Bukhārā—Samarkand begs wait on
Bābur—the end of `Alī-dost—Bābur has news of Shaibānī's
approach to Samarkand and goes to Kesh—hears there that `Alī's
Aūzbeg mother had given Samarkand to Shaibānī on
condition of his marriage with herself 108-126

906 AH.—July 28th 1500 to July 17th 1501 AD.—Shaibānī murders
`Alī—a son and two grandsons of Aḥrārī's murdered—Bābur leaves
Kesh with a number of the Samarkand begs—is landless and
isolated—takes a perilous mountain journey back into
Aūrātīpā—comments on the stinginess shewn to himself by
Khusrau Shāh and another—consultation and resolve to attempt
Samarkand—Bābur's dream-vision of success—he takes the town by
a surprise attack—compares this capture with Ḥusain
_Bāī-qarā's_ of Herī—his affairs in good position—birth of his
first child—his summons for help to keep the Aūzbeg
down—literary matters—his force of 240 grows to allow him to
face Shaibānī at Sar-i-pul—the battle and his defeat—Mughūls
help his losses—he is besieged in Samarkand—a long
blockade—great privation—no help from any quarter—Futile
proceedings of Taṃbal and The Khān 127-145

907 AH.—July 17th 1501 to July 7th 1502 AD.—Bābur surrenders
Samarkand—his sister Khān-zāda is married by Shaibānī—incidents
of his escape to Dīzak—his 4 or 5 escapes from
peril to safety and ease—goes to Dikh-kat in Aūrātīpā—incidents
of his stay there—his wanderings bare-head, bare-foot—sends
gifts to Jahāngīr, and to Taṃbal a sword which
later wounds himself—arrival from Samarkand of the
families and a few hungry followers—Shaibānī Khān raids
in The Khān's country—Bābur rides after him fruitlessly—Death
of Nuyān Kūkūldāsh—Bābur's grief for his friend—he
retires to the Zar-afshān valley before Shaibānī—reflects
on the futility of his wanderings and goes to The Khān in
Tāshkīnt—Mughūl conspiracy against Taṃbal _Mughūl_—Bābur
submits verses to The Khān and comments on his
uncle's scant study of poetic idiom—The Khān rides out
against Taṃbal—his standards acclaimed and his army
numbered—of the _Chīngīz-tūrā_—quarrel of Chīrās and
Begchīk chiefs for the post of danger—Hunting—Khujand-river
reached 146-156

908 AH.—July 7th 1502 to June 26th 1503 AD.—Bābur comments on
The Khān's unprofitable move—his poverty and despair in
Tāshkīnt—his resolve to go to Khitāī and ruse for getting
away—his thought for his mother—his plan not accepted by The
Khān and Shāh Begīm—The Younger Khān (Aḥmad) arrives from
Kāshghar—is met by Bābur—a half-night's family talk—gifts to
Bābur—the meeting of the two Khāns—Aḥmad's characteristics and
his opinion of various weapons—The Khāns march into Farghāna
against Jahāngīr's supporter Taṃbal—they number their
force—Bābur detached against Aūsh, takes it and has great
accretions of following—An attempt to take Andijān frustrated
by mistake in a pass-word—Author's Note on pass-words—a second
attempt foiled by the over-caution of experienced begs—is
surprised in his bivouac by Taṃbal—face to face with
Taṃbal—his new _gosha-gīr_—his dwindling company—wounded—left
alone, is struck by his gift-sword—escapes to Aūsh—The Khān
moves from Kāsān against Andijān—his disposition of Bābur's
lands—Qaṃbar-i-`alī's counsel to Bābur rejected—Bābur is
treated by the Younger Khān's surgeon—tales of Mughūl
surgery—Qaṃbar-i-`alī flees to Taṃbal in fear through his
unacceptable counsel—Bābur moves for Akhsī—a lost chance—minor
actions—an episode of Pāp—The Khāns do not take Andijān—Bābur
invited into Akhsī—Taṃbal's brother Bāyazīd joins him with
Nāṣir _Mīrān-shāhī_—Taṃbal asks help from Shaibānī—On news of
Shaibānī's consent the Khāns retire from Andijān—Bābur's
affairs in Akhsī—he attempts to defend it—incidents of the
defence—Bābur wounded—unequal strength of the opponents—he
flees with 20-30 men—incidents of the flight—Bābur left
alone—is overtaken by two foes—his perilous position—a
messenger arrives from Taṃbal's brother Bāyazīd—Bābur
expecting death, quotes Niz̤āmī—(the narrative breaks off in
the middle of the verse) 157-182

+Translator's Note.+—908 to 909 AH.—1503 to 1504 AD.—Bābur
will have been rescued—is with The Khāns in
the battle and defeat by Shaibānī at Archīān—takes refuge
in the Asfara hills—there spends a year in misery and
poverty—events in Farghāna and Tāshkīnt—Shaibānī
sends the Mughūl horde back to Kāshghar—his disposition
of the women of The Khān's family—Bābur plans to go to
Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ in Khurāsān—changes his aim for Kābul 182-185

[+End of Translator's Note.+]

SECTION II.—KĀBUL

910 AH.—June 14th 1504 to June 4th 1505 AD.—Bābur halts on an
alp of Ḥiṣār—enters his 22nd (lunar) year—delays his march in
hope of adherents—writes a second time of the stinginess of
Khusrau Shāh to himself—recalls Sherīm̤ T̤aghāī _Mughūl's_
earlier waverings in support—is joined by Khusrau Shāh's
brother Bāqī Beg—they start for Kābul—Accretions of
force—their families left in Fort Ajar (Kāhmard)—Jahāngīr
marries a cousin—Bāqī advises his dismissal to Khurāsān—Bābur
is loyal to his half-brother—Jahāngīr is seduced, later, by
disloyal Begchīk chiefs—Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ summons help against
Shaibānī—Despair in Bābur's party at Ḥusain's plan of
"defence, not attack"—Qaṃbar-i-`alī dismissed to please
Bāqī—Khusrau makes abject submission to Bābur—Mīrzā Khān
demands vengeance on him—Khusrau's submission having been on
terms, he is let go free—Bābur resumes his march—first sees
Canopus—is joined by tribesmen—Khusrau's brother Walī flees to
the Aūzbegs and is executed—Risks run by the families now
fetched from Kāhmard—Kābul surrendered to Bābur by Muqīm
_Arghūn_—Muqīm's family protected—+Description of Kābul+ (pp.
199 to 277)—Muqīm leaves for Qandahār—Allotment of
fiefs—Excess levy in grain—Foray on the Sulṯān Mas`ūdī
Hazāra—Bābur's first move for Hindūstān—Khaibar
traversed—Bīgrām visited—Bāqī Beg prevents crossing the
Sind—and persuades for Kohāt—A plan for Bangash, Bannū and
thence return to Kābul—Yār-i-ḥusain _Daryā-khānī_ asks for
permission to raise a force for Bābur, east of the Sind—Move
to Thāl, Bannū, and the Dasht—return route varied without
consulting Bābur—Pīr Kānū's tomb visited—through the
Pawat-pass into Dūkī—horse-food fails—baggage left behind—men
of all conditions walk to Ghaznī—spectacle of the
Āb-istāda—mirage and birds—Jahāngīr is Bābur's host in
Ghaznī—heavy floods—Kābul reached after a disastrous
expedition of four months—Nāṣir's misconduct abetted by two
Begchīk chiefs—he and they flee into Badakhshān—Khusrau Shāh's
schemes fail in Herāt—imbroglio between him and Nāṣir—Shaibānī
attempts Ḥiṣār but abandons the siege on his brother's
death—Khusrau attempts Ḥiṣār and is there killed—his followers
revolt against Bābur—his death quenches the fire of sedition 188-245

911 AH.—June 4th 1505 to May 24th 1506 AD.—Death of
Bābur's mother—Bābur's illness stops a move for Qandahār—an
earth-quake—campaign against and capture of Qalāt-i-ghilzāī—Bāqī
Beg dismissed towards Hindūstān—murdered
in the Khaibar—Turkmān Hazāra raided—Nijr-aū
tribute collected—Jahāngīr misbehaves and runs
away—Bābur summoned by Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ against
Shaibānī—Shaibānī takes Khwārizm and Chīn Ṣūfī is
killed—Death and biography of Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā_ (256 to
292)—his burial and joint-successors 246-293

912 AH.—May 24th 1506 to May 13th 1507 AD.—Bābur, without news
of Ḥusain _Bāī-qarā's_ death, obeys his summons and leaves
Kābul—Jahāngīr flees from Bābur's route—Nāṣir defeats
Shaibānī's men in Badakhshān—Bābur, while in Kāhmard, hears of
Ḥusain's death—continues his march with anxious thought for
the Tīmūrid dynasty—Jahāngīr waits on him and accompanies him
to Herāt—Co-alition of Khurāsān Mīrzās against Shaibānī—their
meeting with Bābur—etiquette of Bābur's reception—an
entertainment to him—of the _Chīngīz-tūrā_—Bābur claims the
ceremonial observance due to his military
achievements—entertainments and Bābur's obedience to
Muḥammadan Law against wine—his reflections on the
Mīrzās—difficulties of winter-plans (300, 307)—he sees the
sights of Herī—visits the Begīms—the ceremonies observed—tells
of his hitherto abstention from wine and of his present
inclination to drink it—Qasīm Beg's interference with those
pressing Bābur to break the Law—Bābur's poor carving—engages
Ma`ṣūma in marriage—leaves for Kābul—certain retainers stay
behind—a perilous journey through snow to a wrong pass out of
the Herīrud valley—arrival of the party in Yakaaūlāng—joy in
their safety and comfort—Shibr-tū traversed into
Ghūr-bunḍ—Turkmān Hazāra raided—News reaches Bābur of
conspiracy in Kābul to put Mīrzā Khān in his place—Bābur
concerts plans with the loyal Kābul garrison—moves on through
snow and in terrible cold—attacks and defeats the
rebels—narrowly escaped death—attributes his safety to
prayer—-deals mercifully, from family considerations, with the
rebel chiefs—reflects on their behaviour to him who has
protected them—asserts that his only aim is to write the
truth—letters-of-victory sent out—Muḥ. Ḥusain _Dūghlāt_ and
Mīrzā Khān banished—Spring excursion to Koh-dāman—Nāṣir,
driven from Badakhshān, takes refuge with Bābur 294-322

913 AH.—May 13th 1507 to May 2nd 1508 AD.—Raid on the Ghiljī
Afghāns—separation of the Fifth (_Khams_)—wild-ass,
hunting—Shaibānī moves against Khurāsān—Irresolution of the
Tīmūrid Mīrzās—Infatuation of Ẕū'n-nūn _Arghūn_—Shaibānī takes
Herī—his doings there—Defeat and death of two _Bāī-qarās_—The
Arghūns in Qandahār make overtures to Bābur—he starts to join
them against Shaibānī—meets Ma`ṣūma in Ghaznī on her way to
Kābul—spares Hindūstān traders—meets Jahāngīr's widow and
infant-son coming from Herāt—The Arghūn chiefs provoke attack
on Qandahār—Bābur's army—organization and terminology—wins the
battle of Qandahār and enters the fort—its spoils—Nāṣir put in
command—Bābur returns to Kābul rich in goods and fame—marries
Ma`ṣūma—Shaibānī lays siege to Qandahār—Alarm in Kābul at his
approach—Mīrzā Khān and Shāh Begīm betake themselves to
Badakhshān—Bābur sets out for Hindūstān leaving `Abdu'r-razzāq
in Kābul—Afghān highwaymen—A raid for food—Māhchuchak's
marriage—Hindūstān plan abandoned—Nūr-gal and Kūnār
visited—News of Shaibānī's withdrawal from Qandahār—Bābur
returns to Kābul—gives Ghaznī to Nāṣir—assumes the title of
Pādshāh—Birth of Humāyūn, feast and chronogram 323-344

914 AH.—May 2nd 1508 to April 21st 1509 AD.—Raid on the
Mahmand Afghāns—Seditious offenders reprieved—Khusrau Shāh's
former retainers march off from Kābul—`Abdu'r-razzāq comes
from his district to near Kābul—not known to have joined the
rebels—earlier hints to Bābur of this "incredible"
rebellion—later warnings of an immediate rising 345-346

+Translator's Note.+—914 to 925 AH.—1508 to 1519 AD.—Date of
composition of preceding narrative—Loss of matter here seems
partly or wholly due to Bābur's death—Sources helping to fill
the Gap—Events of the remainder of 914 AH.—The mutiny swiftly
quelled—Bābur's five-fold victory over hostile champions—Sa`īd
_Chaghatāī_ takes refuge with him in a quiet Kābul—Shaibānī's
murders of Chaghatāī and Dūghlāt chiefs 347-366

915 AH.—April 21st 1509 to April 11th 1510 AD.—Beginning of
hostilities between Ismā`īl _Ṣafawī_ and Shaibānī—Ḥaidar
_Dūghlāt_ takes refuge with Bābur.

916 AH.—April 11th 1510 to March 31st 1511 AD.—Ismā`īl defeats
the Aūzbegs near Merv—Shaibānī is killed—20,000 Mughūls he
had migrated to Khurāsān, return to near Qūndūz—Mīrzā Khān
invites Bābur to join him against the Aūzbegs—Bābur goes to
Qūndūz—The 20,000 Mughūls proffer allegiance to their
hereditary Khān Sa`īd—they propose to set Bābur aside—Sa`īd's
worthy rejection of the proposal—Bābur makes Sa`īd The Khān of
the Mughūls and sends him and his Mughūls into
Farghāna—significance of Bābur's words, "I made him
Khān"—Bābur's first attempt on Ḥiṣār where were Ḥamza and
Mahdī _Aūzbeg_—beginning of his disastrous intercourse with
Ismā`īl _Ṣafawī_—Ismā`īl sends Khān-zāda Begīm back to
him—with thanks for the courtesy, Bābur asks help against the
Aūzbeg—it is promised under dangerous conditions.

917 AH.—March 31st 1511 to March 19th 1512 AD.—Bābur's
second attempt on Ḥiṣār—wins the Battle of Pul-i-sangīn—puts
Ḥamza and Mahdī to death—his Persian reinforcement
and its perilous cost—The Aūzbegs are swept across the
Zar-afshān—The Persians are dismissed from Bukhārā—Bābur
occupies Samarkand after a nine-year's absence—he
gives Kābul to Nāṣir—his difficult position in relation to
the Shī`a Ismā`īl—Ismā`īl sends Najm S̤ānī to bring him
to order.

918 AH.—March 19th 1512 to March 9th 1513 AD.—The Aūzbegs
return to the attack—`Ubaid's vow—his defeat of Bābur at
Kūl-i-malik—Bābur flees from Samarkand to Ḥiṣār—his
pursuers retire—Najm S̤ānī from Balkh gives him rendezvous
at Tīrmīẕ—the two move for Bukhārā—Najm perpetrates
the massacre of Qarshī—Bābur is helpless to prevent
it—Najm crosses the Zar-afshān to a disadvantageous
position—is defeated and slain—Bābur, his reserve, does
not fight—his abstention made a reproach at the Persian
Court against his son Humāyūn (1544 AD.?)—his arrow-sped
message to the Aūzbeg camp—in Ḥiṣār, he is attacked
suddenly by Mughūls—he escapes to Qūndūz—the retributive
misfortunes of Ḥiṣār—Ḥaidar on Mughūls—Ayūb _Begchīk's_
death-bed repentance for his treachery to Bābur—Ḥaidar returns
to his kinsfolk in Kāshghar.

919 AH.—March 9th 1513 to Feb. 26th 1514 AD.—Bābur may
have spent the year in Khishm—Ismā`īl takes Balkh from
the Aūzbegs—surmised bearing of the capture on his later
action.

920 AH.—Feb. 26th 1514 to Feb. 15th 1515 AD.—Ḥaidar's
account of Bābur's misery, patience and courtesy this year
in Qūndūz—Bābur returns to Kābul—his daughter Gulrang
is born in Khwāst—he is welcomed by Nāṣir who
goes back to Ghaznī.

921 AH.—Feb. 15th 1515 to Feb. 5th 1516 AD.—Death of
Nāṣir—Riot in Ghaznī led by Sherīm T̤aghāī _Mughūl_—quiet
restored—many rebels flee to Kāshghar—Sherīm
refused harbourage by Sa`īd Khān and seeks Bābur's
protection—Ḥaidar's comment on Bābur's benevolence.

922 AH.—Feb. 5th 1516 to Jan. 24th 1517 AD.—A quiet year
in Kābul apparently—Birth of `Askarī.

923 AH.—Jan. 24th 1517 to Jan. 13th 1518 AD.—Bābur visits
Balkh—Khwānd-amīr's account of the affairs of Muhammad-i-zamān
Mīrza _Bāī-qarā_—Bābur pursues the Mīrzā—has him brought to
Kābul—gives him his daughter Ma`ṣūma in marriage—An expedition
to Qandahār returns fruitless, on account of his illness—Shāh
Beg's views on Bābur's persistent attempts on Qandahār—Shāh
Beg's imprisonment and release by his slave Saṃbal's means.

924 AH.—Jan. 13th 1518 to Jan. 3rd 1519 AD.—Shāh Beg's son
Ḥasan flees to Bābur—stays two years—date of his return
to his father—Bābur begins a campaign in Bajaur against
Ḥaidar-i-`alī _Bajaurī_—takes two forts.

[+End of Translator's Note.+]

925 AH.—Jan. 3rd to Dec. 23rd 1519 AD.—Bābur takes the Fort of
Bajaur—massacres its people as false to Islām—Khwāja Kalān
made its Commandant—an excessive impost in grain—a raid for
corn—Māhīm's adoption of Dil-dār's unborn child—Bābur marries
Bībī Mubārika—Repopulation of the Fort of Bajaur—Expedition
against Afghān tribesmen—Destruction of the tomb of a heretic
qalandar—Bābur first crosses the Sind—his long-cherished
desire for Hindūstān—the ford of the Sind—the Koh-i-jūd
(Salt-range)—his regard for Bhīra, Khūsh-āb, Chīn-ab and
Chīnīūt as earlier possessions of the Turk, now therefore his
own—the Kalda-kahār lake and subsequent location on it of the
Bāgh-i-ṣafā—Assurance of safety sent to Bhīra as a Turk
possession—History of Bhīra _etc._ as Turk
possessions—Author's Note on Tātār Khān _Yūsuf-khail_—envoys
sent to Balūchīs in Bhīra—heavy floods in camp—Offenders
against Bhīra people punished—Agreed tribute collected—Envoy
sent to ask from Ibrāhīm _Lūdī_ the lands once dependent on
the Turk—Daulat Khān arrests and keeps the envoy who goes
back later to Bābur _re infectâ_—news of Hind-āl's birth and
cause of his name—description of a drinking-party—Tātār Khān
_Kakar_ compels Minūchihr Khān _Turk_, going to wait on Bābur,
to become his son-in-law—Account of the Kakars—excursions and
drinking-parties—Bhīra appointments—action taken against Hātī
Khān _Kakar_—Description and capture of Parhāla—Bābur sees the
saṃbal plant—a tiger killed—Gūr-khattrī visited—Loss of a
clever hawk—Khaibar traversed—mid-day halt in the
Bāgh-i-wafā—Qarā-tū garden visited—News of Shāh Beg's capture
of Kāhān—Bābur's boys carried out in haste to meet
him—wine-parties—Death and biography of Dost Beg—Arrival of
Sulṯānīm _Bāī-qarā_ and ceremonies observed on meeting her—A
long-imprisoned traitor released—Excursion to Koh-dāman—Hindū
Beg abandons Bhīra—Bābur has (intermittent) fever—Visitors
from Khwāst—Yūsuf-zāī chiefs wait on Bābur—Khalīfa's son sends
a wedding-gift—Bābur's amusement when illness keeps him from
an entertainment—treatment of his illness—A Thursday reading
of theology (_see_ Add. Note p. 401)—Swimming—Envoy from Mīrzā
Khān—Tribesmen allowed to leave Kābul for wider
grazing-grounds—Bābur sends his first _Dīwān_ to Pūlād
_Aūzbeg_ in Samarkand—Arrivals and departures—Punitive
expedition against the `Abdu'r-rahman Afghāns—punishment
threatened and inflicted (p. 405) on defaulters in help to an
out-matched man—Description of the Rustam-maidān—return to
Kābul—Excursion to Koh-dāman—snake incident—Tramontane begs
warned for service—fish-drugging—Bābur's non-pressure to
drink, on an abstainer—wine-party—misadventure on a
raft—toothpicks gathered—A new retainer—Bābur shaves his
head—Hind-āl's guardian appointed—Aūzbeg raiders defeated in
Badakhshān—Various arrivals—Yūsuf-zāī campaign—Bābur
dislocates his wrist—_Varia_—Dilah-zāk chiefs wait on him—Plan
to store corn in Hash-nagar—Incidents of the road—Khaibar
traversed—Bārā urged on Bābur as a place for corn—Kābul river
forded at Bārā—little corn found and the Hash-nagar plan
foiled—Plan to store Pashāwar Fort—return to `Alī-masjid—News
of an invasion of Badakhshān hurries Bābur back through the
Khaibar—The Khiẓr-khail Afghāns punished—Bābur first writes
since dislocating his wrist—The beauty and fruits of the
Bāgh-i-wafā—incidents of the return march to Kābul—Excursion
to the Koh-dāman—beauty of its harvest crops and autumnal
trees—a line offensive to Khalīfa (_see_ Add. Note p.
416)—Humāyūn makes a good shot—Beauty of the harvest near
Istālīf and in the Bāgh-i-pādshāhī—Return to Kābul—Bābur
receives a white falcon in gift—pays a visit of consolation to
an ashamed drinker—Arrivals various—he finishes copying
`Alī-sher's four _Dīwāns_—An order to exclude from future
parties those who become drunk—Bābur starts for Lāmghān 367-419

926 AH.—Dec. 23rd 1519 to Dec. 12th 1520 AD.—Excursion to
Koh-dāman and Kohistān—incidents of the road—Bābur shoots with
an easy bow, for the first time after the dislocation of his
wrist—Nijr-aū tribute fixed—Excursions in Lāmghān—Kāfir
head-men bring goat-skins of wine—Halt in the Bāgh-i-wafā—its
oranges, beauty and charm—Bābur records his wish and intention
to return to obedience in his 40th year and his consequent
excess in wine as the end approached—composes an air—visits
Nūr-valley—relieves Kwāja Kalān in Bajaur—teaches a talisman
to stop rain—his opinion of the ill-taste and disgusting
intoxication of beer—his reason for summoning Khwāja Kalān,
and trenchant words to Shāh Hasan relieving him—an old beggar
loaded with gifts—the raft strikes a rock—Description of the
Kīndīr spring—Fish taken from fish-ponds—Hunting—Accident to a
tooth—Fishing with a net—A murderer made over to the avengers
of blood—A Qoran chapter read and start made for Kābul—(here
the diary breaks off) 420-425

+Translator's Note.+—926 to 932 AH.—1520 to 1525 AD.—Bābur's
activities in the Gap—missing matter less interesting than
that lost in the previous one—its distinctive mark is
biographical—_Dramatis personæ_—Sources of information 426-444

926 AH.—Dec. 23rd 1519 to Dec. 12th 1520 AD.—Bābur's five
expeditions into Hindūstān—this year's cut short by menace
from Qandahār—Shāh Beg's position—particulars of his menace
not ascertained—+Description of Qandahār-fort+—Bābur's various
sieges—this year's raised because of pestilence within the
walls—Shāh Beg pushes out into Sind.

927 AH.—Dec. 12th 1520 to Dec. 1st 1521 AD.—Two accounts of
this year's siege of Qandahār—(i) that of the
_Ḥabību's-siyar_—(ii) that of the _Tārīkh-i-sind_—concerning
the dates involved—Mīrzā Khān's death.

928 AH.—Dec. 1st 1521 to Nov. 20th 1522 AD.—Bābur and Māhīm
visit Humāyūn in Badakhshān—Expedition to Qandahār—of the duel
between Bābur and Shāh Beg—the Chihil-zīna monument of
victory—Death of Shāh Beg and its date—Bābur's literary work
down to this year.

929 AH.—Nov. 20th 1522 to Nov. 10th 1523 AD.—Hindūstān
affairs—Daulat Khān _Lūdī_, Ibrāhīm _Lūdī_ and Bābur—Dilawār
(son of Daulat Khān) goes to Kābul and asks help against
Ibrāhīm—Bābur prays for a sign of victory—prepares for the
expedition—`Ālam Khān _Lūdī_ (apparently in this year) goes to
Kābul and asks Bābur's help against his nephew Ibrāhīm—Birth
of Gul-badan.

930 AH.—Nov. 10th 1523 to Oct. 27th 1524 AD.—Bābur's fourth
expedition into Hindūstān—differs from earlier ones by its
concert with malcontents in the country—Bābur defeats Bihār
Khān _Lūdī_ near Lāhor—Lāhor occupied—Dībalpūr stormed,
plundered and its people massacred—Bābur moves onward from
Sihrind but returns on news of Daulat Khān's doings—there may
have been also news of Aūzbeg threat to Balkh—The Panj-āb
garrison—Death of Ismā`īl _Ṣafawī_ and of Shāh Beg—Bābur turns
for Kābul—plants bananas in the Bāgh-i-wafā.

931 AH.—Oct. 29th 1524 to Oct. 18th 1525 AD.—Daulat Khān's
large resources—he defeats `Ālam Khān at Dībalpūr—`Ālam Khān
flees to Kābul and again asks help—Bābur's conditions of
reinforcement—`Ālam Khān's subsequent proceedings detailed
_s.a._ 932 AH.—Bābur promises to follow him speedily—is
summoned to Balkh by its Aūzbeg menace—his arrival raises the
siege—he returns to Kābul in time for his start to Hindūstān
in 932 426-444

[+End of Translator's Note.+]

SECTION III—HINDŪSTĀN

932 AH.—Oct. 18th 1525 to Oct. 8th 1526 AD.—Bābur starts on
his fifth expedition into Hindūstān—is attacked by illness at
Gandamak—Humāyūn is late in coming in from
Badakh-shān—Verse-making on the Kābul-river—Bābur makes a
satirical verse such as he had forsworn when writing the
_Mubīn_—attributes a relapse of illness to his breach of
vow—renews his oath—Fine spectacle of the lighted camp at
Alī-masjid—Hunting near Bīgrām—Preparations for ferrying the
Sind—Order to make a list of all with the army, and to count
them up—continuation of illness—Orders sent to the Lāhor begs
to delay engagement till Bābur arrived—The Sind ferried (for
the first time) and the army tale declared as 12,000 good and
bad—The eastward march—unexpected ice—Rendezvous made with the
Lāhor begs—Jat and Gūjūr thieves—a courier sent again to the
begs—News that `Ālam Khān had let Ibrāhīm _Lūdī_ defeat him
near Dihlī—particulars of the engagement—he takes refuge with
Bābur—The Lāhor begs announce their arrival close at
hand—Ibrāhīm's troops retire before Bābur's march—Daulat Khān
_Lūdī_ surrenders Milwat (Malot)—waits on Bābur and is
reproached—Ghāzī Khān's abandonment of his family
censured—Jaswān-valley—Ghāzī Khān pursued—Bābur advances
against Ibrāhīm _Lūdī_—his estimate of his adversary's
strength—`Ālam Khān's return destitute to Bābur—Bābur's march
leads towards Pānīpat—Humāyūn's first affair
succeeds—reiterated news of Ibrāhīm's approach—Bābur's success
in a minor encounter—he arrays and counts his effective
force—finds it under the estimate—orders that every man in the
army shall collect carts towards Rūmī defence—700 carts
brought in—account of the defences of the camp close to the
village of Pānīpat—Bābur on the futility of fear; his excuses
for the fearful in his army—his estimate of Ibrāhīm's army and
of its higher possible numbers—Author's Note on the Aūzbeg
chiefs in Ḥiṣār (918 AH. 1512 AD.)—Preliminary
encounters—Battle and victory of Pānīpat—Ibrāhīm's body
found—Dihlī and Āgra occupied by Bābur—he makes the circuit of
a Farghāna-born ruler in Dihlī—visits other tombs and sees
sights—halts opposite Tūghlūqābād—the _khuṯba_ read for him in
Dihlī—he goes to Āgra—Author's Note on rulers in Gūālīār—The
(Koh-i-nūr) diamond given by the Gūālīār family to
Humāyūn—Bābur's dealings with Ibrāhīm's mother and her
entourage—+Description of Hindūstān+ (pp. 478 to 521)—Revenues
of Hind (p. 521)—Āgra treasure distributed—local disaffection
to Bābur—discontent in his army at remaining in Hindūstān—he
sets the position forth to his Council—Khwāja Kalān decides to
leave—his and Bābur's verses on his desertion—Bābur's force
grows locally—action begun against rebels to Ibrāhīm in the
East—Gifts made to officers, and postings various—Bīban
_Jalwānī_ revolts and is beaten—The Mīr of Bīāna
warned—Mention of Rānā Sangā's failure in his promise to act
with Bābur—Sangā's present action—Decision in Council to leave
Sangā aside and to march to the East—Humāyūn leads out the
army—Bābur makes garden, well and mosque near Āgra—Progress of
Humāyūn's campaign—News of the Aūzbegs in Balkh and
Khurāsān—Affairs of Gujrāt 445-535

933 AH.—Oct. 8th 1526 to Sep. 27th 1527 AD.—Birth announced of
Bābur's son Fārūq—incomplete success in casting a large
mortar—_Varia_—Humāyūn summoned from the East to act against
Sangā—Plundering expedition towards Bīāna—Tahangar, Gūālīār
and Dūlpūr obtained—Ḥamīd Khān _Sārang-khānī_ defeated—Arrival
of a Persian embassy—Ibrāhīm's mother tries to poison
Bābur—+Copy of Bābur's letter detailing the affair+—his
dealings with the poisoner and her agents—Humāyūn's return to
Āgra—Khw. Dost-i-khawānd's arrival from Kābul—Reiterated news
of the approach of Rānā Sangā—Bābur sends an advance force to
Bīāna—Ḥasan Khān _Miwātī_—Tramontane matters disloyal to
Bābur—Trial-test of the large mortar (p. 536)—Bābur leaves
Āgra to oppose Sangā—adverse encounter with Sangā by Bīāna
garrison—Alarming reports of Rājpūt prowess—Spadesmen sent
ahead to dig wells in Madhākūr _pargana_—Bābur halts
there—arrays and moves to Sīkrī—various joinings and
scoutings—discomfiture of a party reconnoitring from Sīkrī—the
reinforcement also overcome—The enemy retires at sight of a
larger troop from Bābur—defence of the Sīkrī camp Rūmī
fashion, with ditch besides—Continued praise of Rājpūt
prowess—Further defence of the camp made to hearten Bābur's
men—20-25 days spent in the above preparations—arrival of 500
men from Kābul—also of Muḥ. Sharīf an astrologer who augurs
ill for Bābur's success—Archers collected and Mīwāt
over-run—Bābur reflects that he had always wished to cease
from the sin of wine—verses about his then position—resolves
to renounce wine—details of the destruction of wine and
precious vessels, and of the building of a commemorative well
and alms-house—his oath to remit a tax if victorious is
recalled to him—he remits the _tamghā_—Shaikh Zain writes the
_farmān_ announcing the two acts—Copy of the _farmān_—Great
fear in Bābur's army—he adjures the Ghāzī spirit in his men
who vow to stand fast—his perilous position—he moves forward
in considerable array—his camp is laid out and protected by
ditch and carts—An omen is taken and gives hope—Khalīfa
advising, the camp is moved—While tents were being set up, the
enemy appears—The battle and victory of Kānwa—described in a
copy of the Letter-of-victory—Bābur inserts this because of
its full particulars (pp. 559 to 574)—assumes the title of
Ghāzī—Chronograms of the victory and also of that in Dībalpūr
(930 AH.)—pursuit of the fugitive foe—escape of Sangā—the
falsely-auguring astrologer banished with a gift—a small
revolt crushed—a pillar of heads set up—Bābur visits
Bīāna—Little water and much heat set aside plan to invade
Sangā's territory—Bābur visits Mīwāt—give some historical
account of it—Commanders rewarded—Alwār visited—Humāyūn and
others allowed to leave Hindūstān—Despatch of the
Letter-of-victory—Various excursions—Humāyūn bidden
farewell—Chandwār and Rāprī recovered—Apportionment of
fiefs—Bīban flees before Bābur's men—Dispersion of troops for
the Rains—Misconduct of Humāyūn and Bābur's grief—Embassy to
`Irāq—Tardī Beg _khāksār_ allowed to return to the
darwesh-life—Bābur's lines to departing friends—The
Ramẓān-feast—Playing-cards—Bābur ill (seemingly with
fever)—visits Dūlpūr and orders a house excavated—visits Bārī
and sees the ebony-tree—has doubt of Bāyazīd _Farmūlī's_
loyalty—his remedial and metrical exercises—his Treatise on
Prosody composed—a relapse of illness—starts on an excursion
to Kūl and Saṃbal 536-586

934 AH.—Sep. 27th 1527 to Sep. 15th 1528 AD.—Bābur visits Kūl
and Saṃbal and returns to Āgra—has fever and ague
intermittently for 20-25 days—goes out to welcome kinswomen—a
large mortar bursts with fatal result—he visits Sīkrī—starts
for Holy War against Chandīrī—sends troops against Bāyazīd
_Farmūlī_—incidents of the march to Chandīrī—account of
Kachwa—account of Chandīrī—its siege—Meantime bad news arrives
from the East—Bābur keeping this quiet, accomplishes the work
in hand—Chandīrī taken—change of plans enforced by defeat in
the East—return northwards—Further losses in the East—Rebels
take post to dispute Bābur's passage of the Ganges—he orders a
pontoon-bridge—his artillery is used with effect, the bridge
finished and crossed and the Afghāns worsted—Tukhta-būghā
_Chaghatāī_ arrives from Kāshgar—Bābur visits Lakhnau—suffers
from ear-ache—reinforces Chīn-tīmūr against the
rebels—Chīn-tīmūr gets the better of Bāyazīd _Farmūlī_—Bābur
settles the affairs of Aūd (Oude) and plans to hunt near 587-602

+Translator's Note.+ (part of 934 AH.)—On the _cir._
half-year's missing matter—known events of the Gap:—Continued
campaign against Bīban and Bāyazīd—Bābur at Jūnpūr, Chausa and
Baksara—swims the Ganges—bestows Sarūn on a Farmūlī—orders a
Chār-bāgh made—is ill for 40 days—is inferred to have visited
Dūlpūr, recalled `Askarī from Multān, sent Khw. Dost-i-khāwand
to Kābul on family affairs which were causing him much
concern—Remarks on the Gap and, incidentally, on the Rāmpūr
Dīwān and verses in it suiting Bābur's illnesses of 934 AH.

[+End of Translator's Note.+]

935 AH. Sep. 15th 1528 to Sep. 5th 1529 AD.—`Askarī reaches
Āgra from Multān—Khwānd-amīr and others arrive from
Khurāsān—Bābur prepares to visit Gūālīār—bids farewell to
kinswomen who are returning to Kābul—marches out—is given an
unsavoury medicament—inspects construction-work in
Dūlpūr—reaches Gūālīār—+Description of Gūālīār+ (p. 607 to p.
614)—returns to Dūlpūr—suffers from ear-ache—inspects work in
Sīkrī and reaches Āgra—visit and welcomes to kinswomen—sends
an envoy to take charge of Rantanbhūr—makes a levy on
stipendiaries—sends letters to kinsfolk in Khurāsān—News
arrives of Kāmrān and Dost-i-khāwand in Kābul—of T̤ahmāsp
_Safawī's_ defeat at Jām of `Ubaidu'l-lāh _Aūzbeg_—of the
birth of a son to Humāyūn, and of a marriage by Kāmrān—he
rewards an artificer—is strongly attacked by fever—for his
healing translates Aḥrārī's _Wālidiyyah-risāla_—account of the
task—Troops warned for service—A long-detained messenger
returns from Humāyūn—Accredited messengers-of-good-tidings
bring the news of Humāyūn's son's birth—an instance of rapid
travel—Further particulars of the Battle of Jām—Letters
written and summarized—+Copy of one to Humāyūn inserted
here+—Plans for an eastern campaign under `Askarī—royal
insignia given to him—Orders for the measurement, stations and
up-keep of the Āgra-Kābul road—the _Mubīn_ quoted—A feast
described—`Askarī bids his Father farewell—Bābur visits Dūlpūr
and inspects his constructions—Persian account of the Battle
of Jām—Bābur decides contingently to go to the East—Balūchī
incursions—News reaches Dūlpūr of the loss of Bihār (town) and
decides Bābur to go East—News of Humāyūn's action in
Badakhshān—Bābur starts from Āgra—honoured arrivals in the
assembly-camp—incidents of the march—congratulations and
gifts sent to Kāmrān, Humāyūn and others—also specimens of the
Bāburī-script, and copies of the translation of the
_Wālidiyyah-risāla_ and the Hindūstān Poems—commends his
building-work to his workmen—makes a new ruler for the better
copying of the _Wālidiyyah-risāla_ translation—letters
written—+Copy of one to Khwāja Kalān inserted here+—Complaints
from Kītīn-qarā _Aūzbeg_ of Bābur's begs on the Balkh
frontier—Bābur shaves his head—Māhīm using his style, orders
her own escort from Kābul to Āgra—Bābur watches
wrestling—leaves the Jumna, disembarks his guns, and goes
across country to Dugdugī on the Ganges—travels by
litter—`Askarī and other Commanders meet him—News of Bīban,
Bāyazīd and other Afghāns—Letters despatched to meet Māhīm on
her road—Bābur sends a copy of his writings to
Samarkand—watches wrestling—hears news of the Afghāns—(here a
surmised survival of record displaced from 934 AH.)—fall of a
river-bank under his horse—swims the Ganges—crosses the Jumna
at Allahābād (Piag) and re-embarks his guns—wrestling
watched—the evil Tons—he is attacked by boils—a Rūmī remedy
applied—a futile attempt to hunt—he sends money-drafts to the
travellers from Kābul—visits places on the Ganges he had seen
last year—receives various letters below Ghāzīpūr—has news
that the Ladies are actually on their way from Kābul—last
year's eclipse recalled—Hindu dread of the Karmā-nāśā
river—wrestling watched—Rūmī remedy for boils used again with
much discomfort—fall of last year's landing-steps at
Baksara—wrestling—Negociations with an envoy of Naṣrat Shāh of
Bengal—Examination into Muḥammad-i-zāman's objections to a
Bihār appointment—despatch of troops to Bihār
(town)—Muḥammad-i-zamān submits requests which are granted—a
small success against Afghāns—Royal insignia given to
Muḥammad-i-zamān, with leave to start for Bihār—Bābur's
boats—News of the Bengal army—Muḥammad-i-zāman recalled
because fighting was probable—Dūdū Bībī and her son Jalāl
escape from Bengal to come to Bābur—Further discussions with
the Bengal envoy—Favourable news from Bihār—Bābur in
Arrah—Position of the Bengal army near the confluence of Gang
and Sārū (Ganges and Gogrā)—Bābur making further effort for
peace, sends an envoy to Naṣrat Shāh—gives Naṣrat's envoy
leave to go conveying an ultimatum—Arrival of a servant from
Māhīm west of the Bāgh-i-ṣafā—Bābur visits lotus-beds near
Arrah—also Munīr and the Son—Distance measured by counting a
horse's paces—care for tired horses—Bābur angered by Junaid
_Barlās'_ belated arrival—Consultation and plans made for the
coming battle—the Ganges crossed (by the Burh-ganga channel)
and move made to near the confluence—Bābur watches `Alī-qulī's
stone-discharge—his boat entered by night—Battle and victory
of the Gogrā—Bābur praises and thanks his Chaghatāī cousins
for their great services—crosses into the Nirhun _pargana_—his
favours to a Farmūlī—News of Bīban and Bāyazīd—and of the
strange deaths in Saṃbal—Chīn-tīmūr sends news from the west
of inconveniences caused by the Ladies' delay to leave
Kābul—and of success against the Balūchī—he is ordered to
Āgra—Settlement made with the Nuḥānī Afghāns—Peace made with
Naṣrat Shāh—Submissions and various guerdon—Bīban and Bāyazīd
pursued—Bābur's papers damaged in a storm—News of the rebel
pair as taking Luknūr(?)—Disposition of Bābur's boats—move
along the Sārū—(a surmised survival of the record of 934
AH.)—Account of the capture of Luknūr(?)—Dispositions against
the rebel pair—fish caught by help of a lamp—incidents of the
march to Adampūr on the Jumna—Bīban and Bāyazīd flee to
Mahūba—Eastern Campaign wound up—Bābur's rapid ride to Āgra
(p. 686)—visits kinswomen—is pleased with Indian-grown
fruits—Māhīm arrives—her gifts and Humāyūn's set before
Bābur—porters sent off for Kābul to fetch fruits—Account of
the deaths in Saṃbal brought in—sedition in Lāhor—wrestling
watched—sedition of Raḥīm-dād in Gūālīār—Mahdī Khwāja comes to
Āgra 605-689

936 AH.—Sep. 5th 1529 to Aug. 25th 1530 AD.—Shaikh Ghaus comes
from Gūālīār to intercede for Raḥīm-dād—Gūālīār taken over 690

+Translator's Note.+—936 and 937 AH.—1529 and 1530 AD.—Sources
from which to fill the Gap down to Bābur's death (December
26th 1530)—Humāyūn's proceedings in Badakhshān—Ḥaidar
_Dūghlāt's_ narrative of them—Humāyūn deserts his post, goes
to Kābul, and, arranging with Kāmrān, sends Hind-āl to
Badakhshān—goes on to Āgra and there arrives unexpected by his
Father—as he is unwilling to return, Sulaimān _Mīrān-shāhī_ is
appointed under Bābur's suzerainty—Sa`īd Khān is warned to
leave Sulaimān in possession—Bābur moves westward to support
him and visits Lāhor—waited on in Sihrind by the Rāja of
Kahlūr—received in Lāhor by Kāmrān and there visited from
Kābul by Hind-āl—leaves Lāhor (March 4th 1530 AD.)—from
Sihrind sends a punitive force against Mundāhir Rājpūts—hunts
near Dihlī—appears to have started off an expedition to
Kashmīr—family matters fill the rest of the year—Humāyūn falls
ill in Saṃbal and is brought to Āgra—his disease not yielding
to treatment, Bābur resolves to practise the rite of
intercession and self-surrender to save his life—is urged
rather to devote the great diamond (Koh-i-nūr) to pious
uses—refuses the substitution of the jewel for his own
life—performs the rite—Humāyūn recovers—Bābur falls ill and is
bedridden till death—his faith in the rite unquestionable,
belief in its efficacy general in the East—Plan to set Bābur's
sons aside from the succession—The _T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī_ story
discussed (p. 702 to 708)—suggested basis of the story (p.
705)—Bābur's death (Jūmāda I. 5th 937 AH.—Dec. 26th 1530 AD.)
and burial first, near Āgra, later near Kābul—Shāh-jahān's
epitaph inscribed on a tablet near the grave—Bābur's wives and
children—Mr. Erskine's estimate of his character 691-716

[+End of Translator's Note.+]

APPENDICES

A. Site and disappearance of old Akhsī.
B. The birds Qīl-qūyīrūgh and Bāghrī-qarā.
C. On the _gosha-gīr_.
D. The Rescue-passage.
E. Nagarahār and Nīng-nahār.
F. The name Dara-i-nūr.
G. On the names of two Dara-i-nūr wines.
H. On the counter-mark Bih-būd of coins.
I. The weeping-willows of f. 190_b_.
J. Bābur's excavated chamber at Qandahār.
K. An Afghān Legend.
L. Māhīm's adoption of Hind-āl.
M. On the term Bahrī-quṯās.
N. Notes on a few birds.
O. Notes by Humāyūn on some Hindūstān fruits.
P. Remarks on Bābur's Revenue List.
Q. On the Rāmpūr Dīwān.
R. Plans of Chandīrī and Gūālīār.
S. The Bābur-nāma dating of 935 AH.
T. On L:knū (Lakhnau) and L:knūr (Lakhnur _i.e._ Shahābād
in Rāmpūr).
U. The Inscriptions in Bābur's Mosque at Ajodhya (Oude).
V. Bābur's Gardens in and near Kābul.

Indices:—I. Personal, II. Geographical, III. General, p. 717
_et seq._

Omissions, Corrigenda, Additional Notes.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

Plane-tree Avenue in Babur's (later)
Burial-garden[1] _facing_ p. xxvii

View from above his grave and Shah-jahan's
Mosque[1] _facing_ p. 367

His Grave[2] _facing_ p. 445

Babur in Prayer[3] _facing_ p. 702

His Signature App. Q, lxi

Plans of Chandiri and Gualiar App. R, lxvii

[Illustration: Plane-tree Avenue in Babur's (later)
Burial-garden.]

PREFACE.

O Spring of work! O Source of power to Be!
Each line, each thought I dedicate to Thee;
Each time I fail, the failure is my own,
But each success, a jewel in Thy Throne.

JESSIE E. CADELL.

INTRODUCTORY.

This book is a translation of Babur Padshah's Autobiography, made from
the original Turki text. It was undertaken after a purely-Turki
manuscript had become accessible in England, the Haidarabad Codex (1915)
which, being in Babur's _ipsissima verba_, left to him the control of
his translator's diction—a control that had been impracticable from the
time when, under Akbar (1589), his book was translated into Persian.
What has come down to us of pure text is, in its shrunken amount, what
was translated in 1589. It is difficult, here and there, to interpret
owing to its numerous and in some places extensive _lacunae_, and
presents more problems than one the solution of which has real
importance because they have favoured suggestions of malfeasance by
Babur.

My translation has been produced under considerable drawback, having
been issued in four _fasciculi_, at long intervals, respectively in June
1912, May 1914, October 1917, and September 1921. I have put with it of
supplementary matter what may be of service to those readers whom
Babur's personality attracts and to those who study Turki as a
linguistic entertainment, but owing to delays in production am unable to
include the _desiderata_ of maps.

CHAPTER I.

BABUR'S EXEMPLARS IN THE ARTS OF PEACE.

Babur's civilian aptitudes, whether of the author and penman, the maker
of gardens, the artist, craftsman or sportsman, were nourished in a
fertile soil of family tradition and example. Little about his teaching
and training is now with his mutilated book, little indeed of any kind
about his præ-accession years, not the date of his birth even, having
escaped destruction.[4] Happily Haidar Mirza (_q.v._) possessed a more
complete Codex than has come down to us through the Timurid libraries,
and from it he translated many episodes of Baburiana that help to bridge
gaps and are of special service here where the personalities of Bābur's
early environment are being named.

Babur's home-milieu favoured excellence in the quiet Arts and set before
its children high standard and example of proficiency. Moreover, by
schooling him in obedience to the Law, it planted in him some of Art's
essentials, self-restraint and close attention. Amongst primal
influences on him, his mother Qut-luq-nigar's ranked high; she,
well-born and a scholar's daughter, would certainly be educated in Turki
and Persian and in the home-accomplishments her governess possessed
_(ātūn_ q.v.). From her and her mother Aisan-daulat, the child would
learn respect for the attainments of his wise old grandfather Yunas
Khan. Aisan-daulat herself brought to her grandson much that goes to the
making of a man; nomad-born and sternly-bred, she was brave to obey her
opinion of right, and was practically the boy's ruling counsellor
through his early struggle to hold Farghana. With these two in fine
influence must be counted Khan-zada, his five-years elder sister who
from his birth to his death proved her devotion to him. Her life-story
tempts, but is too long to tell; her girlish promise is seen fulfilled
in Gul-badan's pages. `Umar Shaikh's own mother Shah Sultan Begim
brought in a type of merit widely differing from that of Aisan-daulat
Begim; as a town-lady of high Tarkhan birth, used to the amenities of
life in a wealthy house of Samarkand, she was, doubtless, an
accomplished and cultured woman.

`Umar Shaikh's environment was dominated for many years by two great
men, the scholar and lover of town-life Yunas Khan and the saintly
Ahrari (_i.e._ Khwaja `Ubaidu'l-lah) who were frequently with him in
company, came at Babur's birth and assisted at his naming. Ahrari died
in 895-1491 when the child was about seven years old but his influence
was life-long; in 935-1529 he was invoked as a spiritual helper by the
fever-stricken Babur and his mediation believed efficacious for recovery
(pp. 619, 648). For the babe or boy to be where the three friends held
social session in high converse, would be thought to draw blessing on
him; his hushed silence in the presence would sow the seed of reverence
for wisdom and virtue, such, for example, as he felt for Jami (_q.v._).
It is worth while to tell some part at least of Yunas' attainments in
the gentler Arts, because the biography from which they are quoted may
well have been written on the information of his wife Aisan-daulat, and
it indicates the breadth of his exemplary influence. Yunas was many
things—penman, painter, singer, instrumentalist, and a past master in
the crafts. He was an expert in good companionship, having even temper
and perfect manners, quick perception and conversational charm. His
intellectual distinction was attributed to his twelve years of wardship
under the learned and highly honoured Yazdi (Sharafu'd-din 'Ali), the
author of the _Zafar-nama_ [Timur's Book of Victory]. That book was in
hand during four years of Yunas' education; he will thus have known it
and its main basis Timur's Turki _Malfūzāt_ (annals). What he learned of
either book he would carry with him into `Umar Shaikh's environment,
thus magnifying the family stock of Timuriya influence. He lived to be
some 74 years old, a length of days which fairly bridged the gap between
Timur's death [807-1404] and Babur's birth (888-1483). It is said that
no previous Khan of his (Chaghatai) line had survived his 40th year; his
exceptional age earned him great respect and would deepen his influence
on his restless young son-in-law `Umar Shaikh. It appears to have been
in `Umar's 20th year (_cir._) that Yunas Khan began the friendly
association with him that lasted till Yunas' death (892-1483), a
friendship which, as disparate ages would dictate, was rather that of
father and son than of equal companionship. One matter mentioned in the
Khan's biography would come to Babur's remembrance in the future days
when he, like Yunas, broke the Law against intoxicants and, like him,
repented and returned.

That two men of the calibre and high repute of Ahrari and Yunas
maintained friendly guidance so long over `Umar cannot but be held an
accreditment and give fragrance of goodness to his name. Apart from the
high justice and generosity his son ascribes to him, he could set other
example, for he was a reader of great books, the Qoran and the _Masnawi_
being amongst his favourites. This choice, it may be, led Abu'l-faẓl to
say he had the darwesh-mind. Babur was old enough before `Umar's death
to profit by the sight of his father enjoying the perusal of such books.
As with other parents and other children, there would follow the happy
stilling to a quiet mood, the piquing of curiosity as to what was in the
book, the sight of refuge taken as in a haven from self and care, and
perhaps, Babur being intelligent and of inquiring mind and `Umar a
skilled reciter, the boy would marvel at the perennial miracle that a
lifeless page can become eloquent—gentle hints all, pointers of the way
to literary creation.

Few who are at home in Baburiana but will take Timur as Babur's great
exemplar not only as a soldier but as a chronicler. Timur cannot have
seemed remote from that group of people so well-informed about him and
his civilian doings; his Shahrukhi grandchildren in Samarkand had
carried on his author-tradition; the 74 years of Yunas Khan's life had
bridged the gap between Timur's death in 807-1405 and Babur's birth in
888-1483. To Babur Timur will have been exemplary through his grandson
Aulugh Beg who has two productions to his credit, the _Char-ulus_ (Four
Hordes) and the Kurkani Astronomical Tables. His sons, again, Babur
(_qalandar_) and Ibrahim carried on the family torch of letters, the
first in verse and the second by initiating and fostering Yazdi's
labours on the _Zafar-nama_. Wide-radiating and potent influence for the
Arts of Peace came forth from Herat during the reign of that Sultan
Husain Mirza whose Court Babur describes in one of the best supplements
to his autobiography. Husain was a Timurid of the elder branch of
Bai-qara, an author himself but far more effective as a Macænas; one man
of the shining galaxy of competence that gave him fame, set pertinent
example for Babur the author, namely, the Andijani of noble Chaghatai
family, 'Ali-sher _Nawa'i_ who, in classic Turki verse was the master
Babur was to become in its prose. That the standard of effort was high
in Herat is clear from Babur's dictum (p. 233) that whatever work a man
took up, he aspired to bring it to perfection. Elphinstone varies the
same theme to the tune of equality of excellence apart from social
status, writing to Erskine (August, 1826), that "it gives a high notion
of the time to find" (in Babur's account of Husain's Court) "artists,
musicians and others, described along with the learned and great of the
Age".

My meagre summary of Babur's exemplars would be noticeably incomplete if
it omitted mention of two of his life-long helpers in the gentler Arts,
his love of Nature and his admiration for great architectural creations.
The first makes joyous accompaniment throughout his book; the second is
specially called forth by Timur's ennoblement of Samarkand. Timur had
built magnificently and laid out stately gardens; Babur made many a
fruitful pleasaunce and gladdened many an arid halting-place; he built a
little, but had small chance to test his capacity for building greatly;
never rich, he was poor in Kabul and several times destitute in his
home-lands. But his sword won what gave wealth to his Indian Dynasty,
and he passed on to it the builder's unused dower, so that Samarkand was
surpassed in Hindustan and the spiritual conception Timur's creations
embodied took perfect form at Sikandra where Akbar lies entombed.

CHAPTER II.

PROBLEMS OF THE MUTILATED BABUR-NAMA.

Losses from the text of Babur's book are the more disastrous because it
truly embodies his career. For it has the rare distinction of being
contemporary with the events it describes, is boyish in his boyhood,
grows with his growth, matures as he matured. Undulled by retrospect, it
is a fresh and spontaneous recital of things just seen, heard or done.
It has the further rare distinction of shewing a boy who, setting a
future task before him—in his case the revival of Timurid power,—began
to chronicle his adventure in the book which through some 37 years was
his twinned comrade, which by its special distinctions has attracted
readers for nearly a half-millennium, still attracts and still is a
thing apart from autobiographies which look back to recall dead years.

Much circumstance makes for the opinion that Babur left his life-record
complete, perhaps repaired in places and recently supplemented, but
continuous, orderly and lucid; this it is not now, nor has been since it
was translated into Persian in 1589, for it is fissured by _lacunæ_, has
neither Preface nor Epilogue,[5] opens in an oddly abrupt and
incongruous fashion, and consists of a series of fragments so
disconnected as to demand considerable preliminary explanation. Needless
to say, its dwindled condition notwithstanding, it has place amongst
great autobiographies, still revealing its author playing a man's part
in a drama of much historic and personal interest. Its revelation is
however now like a portrait out of drawing, because it has not kept the
record of certain years of his manhood in which he took momentous
decisions,(1) those of 1511-12 (918) in which he accepted
reinforcement—at a great price—from Isma`il the Shi`a Shah of Persia,
and in which, if my reading be correct, he first (1512) broke the Law
against the use of wine,[6] (2) those of 1519-1525 [926-932], in which
his literary occupations with orthodox Law (_see Mubin_) associated with
cognate matters of 932 AH. indicate that his return to obedience had
begun, in which too was taken the decision that worked out for his fifth
expedition across the Indus with its sequel of the conquest of Hind.—The
loss of matter so weighty cannot but destroy the balance of his record
and falsify the drawing of his portrait.

a. _Problem of Titles._

As nothing survives to decide what was Babur's chosen title for his
autobiography, a modern assignment of names to distinguish it from its
various descendants is desirable, particularly so since the revival of
interest in it towards which the Facsimile of its Haidarabad Codex has
contributed.[7]

_Babur-nama_ (History of Babur) is a well-warranted name by which to
distinguish the original Turki text, because long associated with this
and rarely if ever applied to its Persian translation.[8] It is not
comprehensive because not covering supplementary matter of biography
and description but it has use for modern readers of classing
Babur's with other Timuriya and Timurid histories such as the
_Zafar-Humayun-Akbar-namas_.

_Waqi`āt-i-baburi_ (Babur's Acts), being descriptive of the book and in
common use for naming both the Turki and Persian texts, might usefully
be reserved as a title for the latter alone.

Amongst European versions of the book _Memoirs of Baber_ is Erskine's
peculium for the Leyden and Erskine Perso-English translation—_Mémoires
de Baber_ is Pavet de Courteille's title for his French version of the
Bukhara [Persified-Turki] compilation—_Babur-nama in English_ links the
translation these volumes contain with its purely-Turki source.

b. _Problems of the Constituents of the Books._

Intact or mutilated, Babur's material falls naturally into three
territorial divisions, those of the lands of his successive rule,
Farghana (with Samarkand), Kabul and Hindustan. With these are distinct
sub-sections of description of places and of obituaries of kinsmen.

The book might be described as consisting of annals and diary, which
once met within what is now the gap of 1508-19 (914-925). Round this
gap, amongst others, bristle problems of which this change of literary
style is one; some are small and concern the mutilation alone, others
are larger, but all are too intricate for terse statement and all might
be resolved by the help of a second MS. _e.g._ one of the same strain as
Haidar's.

Without fantasy another constituent might be counted in with the three
territorial divisions, namely, the grouped _lacunæ_ which by their
engulfment of text are an untoward factor in an estimate either of Babur
or of his book. They are actually the cardinal difficulty of the book as
it now is; they foreshorten purview of his career and character and
detract from its merits; they lose it perspective and distort its
proportions. That this must be so is clear both from the value and the
preponderating amount of the lost text. It is no exaggeration to say
that while working on what survives, what is lost becomes like a
haunting presence warning that it must be remembered always as an
integral and the dominant part of the book.

The relative proportions of saved and lost text are highly
significant:—Babur's commemorable years are about 47 and 10 months,
_i.e._ from his birth on Feb. 14th 1483 to near his death on Dec. 26th
1530; but the aggregate of surviving text records some 18 years only,
and this not continuously but broken through by numerous gaps. That
these gaps result from loss of pages is frequently shewn by a broken
sentence, an unfinished episode. The fragments—as they truly may be
called—are divided by gaps sometimes seeming to remove a few pages only
(cf. _s.a._ 935 AH.), sometimes losing the record of 6 and _cir._ 18
months, sometimes of 6 and 11 years; besides these actual clefts in the
narrative there are losses of some 12 years from its beginning and some
16 months from its end. Briefly put we now have the record of _cir._ 18
years where that of over 47 could have been.[9]

c. _Causes of the gaps._

Various causes have been surmised to explain the _lacunæ_; on the plea
of long intimacy with Babur's and Haidar's writings, I venture to say
that one and all appear to me the result of accident. This opinion rests
on observed correlations between the surviving and the lost record,
which demand complement—on the testimony of Haidar's extracts, and
firmly on Babur's orderly and persistent bias of mind and on the
prideful character of much of the lost record. Moreover occasions of
risk to Babur's papers are known.

Of these occasions the first was the destruction of his camp near Hisar
in 1512 (918; p. 357) but no information about his papers survives; they
may not have been in his tent but in the fort. The second was a case of
recorded damage to "book and sections" (p. 679) occurring in 1529 (935).
From signs of work done to the Farghana section in Hindustan, the damage
may be understood made good at the later date. To the third exposure to
damage, namely, the attrition of hard travel and unsettled life during
Humayun's 14 years of exile from rule in Hindustan (1441-1555) it is
reasonable to attribute even the whole loss of text. For, assuming—as
may well be done—that Babur left (1530) a complete autobiography, its
volume would be safe so long as Humayun was in power but after the
Timurid exodus (1441) his library would be exposed to the risks detailed
in the admirable chronicles of Gul-badan, Jauhar and Bayazid (_q.v._).
He is known to have annotated his father's book in 1555 (p. 466 n. 1)
just before marching from Kabul to attempt the re-conquest of Hindustan.
His Codex would return to Dihli which he entered in July 1555, and there
would be safe from risk of further mutilation. Its condition in 1555 is
likely to have remained what it was found when `Abdu'r-rahim translated
it into Persian by Akbar's orders (1589) for Abu'l-faẓl's use in the
_Akbar-nama_. That Persian translation with its descendant the _Memoirs
of Baber_, and the purely-Turki Haidarabad Codex with its descendant the
_Babur-nama in English_, contain identical contents and, so doing, carry
the date of the mutilation of Babur's Turki text back through its years
of safety, 1589 to 1555, to the period of Humayun's exile and its
dangers for camel-borne or deserted libraries.

d. _Two misinterpretations of lacunæ._

Not unnaturally the frequent interruptions of narrative caused by
_lacunæ_ have been misinterpreted occasionally, and sometimes
detractory comment has followed on Babur, ranking him below the
accomplished and lettered, steadfast and honest man he was. I select two
examples of this comment neither of which has a casual origin.

The first is from the _B.M. Cat. of Coins of the Shahs of Persia_ p.
xxiv, where after identifying a certain gold coin as shewing vassalage
by Babur to Isma`il _Safawi_, the compiler of the Catalogue notes, "We
can now understand the omission from Babar's 'Memoirs' of the
occurrences between 914 H. and 925 H." Can these words imply other than
that Babur suppressed mention of minting of the coins shewing
acknowledgment of Shi`a suzerainty? Leaving aside the delicate topic of
the detraction the quoted words imply, much negatives the surmise that
the gap is a deliberate "omission" of text:—(1) the duration of the
Shi`a alliance was 19-20 months of 917-918 AH. (p. 355), why omit the
peaceful or prideful and victorious record of some 9-10 years on its
either verge? (2) Babur's Transoxus campaign was an episode in the
struggle between Shaibaq Khan (Shaibani) _Auzbeg_ and Shah
Isma`il—between Sunni and Shi`a; how could "omission" from his book,
always a rare one, hide what multitudes knew already? "Omission" would
have proved a fiasco in another region than Central Asia, because the
Babur-Haidar story of the campaign, vassal-coinage included,[10] has
been brought into English literature by the English translation of the
_Tarikh-i rashidi_. Babur's frank and self-judging habit of mind would,
I think, lead him to write fully of the difficulties which compelled the
hated alliance and certainly he would tell of his own anger at the
conduct of the campaign by Isma`il's Commanders. The alliance was a
tactical mistake; it would have served Babur better to narrate its
failure.

The second misinterpretation, perhaps a mere surmising gloss, is
Erskine's (_Memoirs_ Supp. p. 289) who, in connection with `Alam Khan's
request to Babur for reinforcement in order to oust his nephew Ibrahim,
observes that "Babur probably flattered `Alam Khan with the hope of
succession to the empire of Hindustan." This idea does not fit the
record of either man. Elphinstone was angered by Erskine's remark which,
he wrote (Aug. 26th 1826) "had a bad effect on the narrative by
weakening the implicit confidence in Babur's candour and veracity which
his frank way of writing is so well-calculated to command."
Elphinstone's opinion of Babur is not that of a reader but of a student
of his book; he was also one of Erskine's staunchest helpers in its
production. From Erskine's surmise others have advanced on the
detractor's path saying that Babur used and threw over `Alam Khan
(_q.v._).

e. _Reconstruction._

Amongst the problems mutilation has created an important one is that of
the condition of the beginning of the book (p. 1 to p. 30) with its
plunge into Babur's doings in his 12th year without previous mention of
even his day and place of birth, the names and status of his parents, or
any occurrences of his præ-accession years. Within those years should be
entered the death of Yunas Khan (1487) with its sequent obituary notice,
and the death of [Khwaja `Ubaidu'l-lah] Ahrari (1491). Not only are
these customary entries absent but the very introductions of the two
great men are wanting, probably with the also missing account of their
naming of the babe Babur. That these routine matters are a part of an
autobiography planned as Babur's was, makes for assured opinion that the
record of more than his first decade of life has been lost, perhaps by
the attrition to which its position in the volume exposed it.

Useful reconstruction if merely in tabulated form, might be effected in
a future edition. It would save at least two surprises for readers, one
the oddly abrupt first sentence telling of Babur's age when he became
ruler in Farghana (p. 1), which is a misfit in time and order, another
that of the sudden interruption of `Umar Shaikh's obituary by a fragment
of Yunas Khan's (p. 19) which there hangs on a mere name-peg, whereas
its place according to Babur's elsewhere unbroken practice is directly
following the death. The record of the missing præ-accession years will
have included at the least as follows:—Day of birth and its place—names
and status of parents—naming and the ceremonial observances proper for
Muhammadan children—visits to kinsfolk in Tashkint, and to Samarkand
(æt. 5, p. 35) where he was betrothed—his initiation in school
subjects, in sport, the use of arms—names of teachers—education in the
rules of his Faith (p. 44), appointment to the Andijan Command _etc._,
_etc._

There is now no fit beginning to the book; the present first sentence
and its pendent description of Farghana should be removed to the
position Babur's practice dictates of entering the description of a
territory at once on obtaining it (cf. Samarkand, Kabul, Hindustan). It
might come in on p. 30 at the end of the topic (partly omitted on p. 29
where no ground is given for the manifest anxiety about Babur's safety)
of the disputed succession (Haidar, trs. p. 135) Babur's partisan begs
having the better of Jahangir's (_q.v._), and having testified
obeisance, he became ruler in Farghana; his statement of age (12 years),
comes in naturally and the description of his newly acquired territory
follows according to rule. This removal of text to a later position has
the advantage of allowing the accession to follow and not precede
Babur's father's death.

By the removal there is left to consider the historical matter of pp.
12-13. The first paragraph concerns matter of much earlier date than
`Umar's death in 1494 (p. 13); it may be part of an obituary notice,
perhaps that of Yunas Khan. What follows of the advance of displeased
kinsmen against `Umar Shaikh would fall into place as part of Babur's
record of his boyhood, and lead on to that of his father's death.

The above is a bald sketch of what might be effected in the interests of
the book and to facilitate its pleasant perusal.

CHAPTER III.

THE TURKI MSS. AND WORK CONNECTING WITH THEM.

This chapter is a literary counterpart of "Babur Padshah's Stone-heap,"
the roadside cairn tradition says was piled by his army, each man laying
his stone when passing down from Kabul for Hindustan in the year of
victory 1525 (932).[11]

For a title suiting its contents is "Babur Padshah's Book-pile," because
it is fashioned of item after item of pen-work done by many men in
obedience to the dictates given by his book. Unlike the cairn, however,
the pile of books is not of a single occasion but of many, not of a
single year but of many, irregularly spacing the 500 years through which
he and his autobiography have had Earth's immortality.

Part I. The MSS. themselves.

_Preliminary._—Much of the information given below was published in the
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society from 1900 onwards, as it came into
my possession during a search for reliable Turki text of the
_Babur-nama_. My notes were progressive; some MSS. were in distant
places, some not traceable, but in the end I was able to examine in
England all of whose continued existence I had become aware. It was
inevitable that some of my earlier statements should be superseded
later; my Notes (_see s.n._ JRAS.) need clearing of transitory matter
and summarizing, in particular those on the Elphinstone Codex and
Klaproth's articles. Neither they nor what is placed here makes claim to
be complete. Other workers will supplement them when the World has
renewed opportunity to stroll in the bye-paths of literature.

Few copies of the _Babur-nama_ seem to have been made; of the few I have
traced as existing, not one contains the complete autobiography, and one
alone has the maximum of dwindled text shewn in the Persian translation
(1589). Two books have been reputed to contain Babur's authentic text,
one preserved in Hindustan by his descendants, the other issuing from
Bukhara. They differ in total contents, arrangement and textual worth;
moreover the Bukhara book compiles items of divers diction and origin
and date, manifestly not from one pen.

The Hindustan book is a record—now mutilated—of the Acts of Babur alone;
the Bukhara book as exhibited in its fullest accessible example, Kehr's
Codex, is in two parts, each having its preface, the first reciting
Babur's Acts, the second Humayun's.

The Bukhara book is a compilation of oddments, mostly translated from
compositions written after Babur's death. Textual and circumstantial
grounds warrant the opinion that it is a distinct work mistakenly
believed to be Babur's own; to these grounds was added in 1903 the
authoritative verdict of collation with the Haidarabad Codex, and in
1921 of the colophon of its original MS. in which its author gives his
name, with the title and date of his compilation (JRAS. 1900, p. 474).
What it is and what are its contents and history are told in Part III of
this chapter.

Part II. Work on the Hindustan MSS.

BABUR'S ORIGINAL CODEX.

My latest definite information about Babur's autograph MS. comes from
the _Padshah-nama_ (Bib. Ind. ed. ii, 4), whose author saw it in
Shah-i-jahan's private library between 1628 and 1638. Inference is
justified, however, that it was the archetype of the Haidarabad Codex
which has been estimated from the quality of its paper as dating _cir._
1700 (JRAS. 1906, p. 97). But two subsequent historic disasters
complicate all questions of MSS. missing from Indian libraries, namely,
Nadir Shah's vengeance on Dihli in 1739 and the dispersions and fires of
the Mutiny. Faint hope is kept alive that the original Codex may have
drifted into private hands, by what has occurred with the Rampur MS. of
Babur's Hindustan verses (App. J), which also appears once to have
belonged to Shah-i-jahan.

Amongst items of work done during Babur's life are copies of his book
(or of the Hindustan section of it) he mentions sending to sons and
friends.

The _Tabaqat-i-baburi_ was written during Babur's life by his Persian
secretary Shaikh Zainu'd-din of Khawaf; it paraphrases in rhetorical
Persian the record of a few months of Hindustan campaigning, including
the battle of Panipat.

TABLE OF THE HINDUSTAN MSS. OF THE BABUR-NAMA.[12]

III

During the first decade of Humayun's reign (1530-40) at least
two important codices seem to have been copied.

The earlier (_see_ Table, No. 2) has varied circumstantial
warrant. It meets the need of an archetype, one marginally
annotated by Humayun, for the Elphinstone Codex in which a few
notes are marginal and signed, others are pell-mell,
interpolated in the text but attested by a scrutineer as having
been marginal in its archetype and mistakenly copied into its
text. This second set has been ineffectually sponged over. Thus
double collation is indicated (i) with Babur's autograph MS. to
clear out extra Babur matter, and (ii) with its archetype, to
justify the statement that in this the interpolations were
marginal.—No colophon survives with the much dwindled Elph.
Codex, but one, suiting the situation, has been observed, where
it is a complete misfit, appended to the Alwar Codex of the
second Persian translation, (estimated as copied in 1589). Into
the incongruities of that colophon it is not necessary to
examine here, they are too obvious to aim at deceit; it appears
fitly to be an imperfect translation from a Turki original,
this especially through its odd fashion of entitling "Humayun
Padshah." It can be explained as translating the colophon of
the Codex (No. 2) which, as his possession, Humayun allowably
annotated and which makes it known that he had ordered
`Ali'u-'l-katib to copy his father's Turki book, and that it
was finished in February, 1531, some six weeks after Babur's
death.[15]

The later copy made in Humayun's first decade is Haidar Mirza's
(_infra_).

Muhammad Haidar Mirza _Dughlat's_ possession of a copy of the
Autobiography is known both from his mention of it and through
numerous extracts translated from it in his _Tarikh-i-rashidi_.
As a good boy-penman (p. 22) he may have copied down to 1512
(918) while with Babur (p. 350), but for obtaining a transcript
of it his opportunity was while with Humayun before the
Timurid exodus of 1541. He died in 1551; his Codex is likely to
have found its way back from Kashmir to his ancestral home in
the Kashghar region and there it may still be. (_See_ T.R. trs.
Ney Elias' biography of him).

The Elphinstone Codex[16] has had an adventurous career. The
enigma of its archetype is posed above; it may have been copied
during Akbar's first decade (1556-67); its, perhaps first,
owner was a Bai-qara rebel (d. 1567) from amongst whose
possessions it passed into the Royal Library, where it was
cleared of foreign matter by the expunction of Humayun's
marginal notes which its scribe had interpolated into its text.
At a date I do not know, it must have left the Royal Library
for its fly-leaves bear entries of prices and in 1810 it was
found and purchased in Peshawar by Elphinstone. It went with
him to Calcutta, and there may have been seen by Leyden during
the short time between its arrival and the autumn month of the
same year (1810) when he sailed for Java. In 1813 Elphinstone
in Poona sent it to Erskine in Bombay, saying that he had
fancied it gone to Java and had been writing to `Izzatu'l-lah
to procure another MS. for Erskine in Bukhara, but that all the
time it was on his own shelves. Received after Erskine had
dolefully compared his finished work with Leyden's (tentative)
translation, Erskine sadly recommenced the review of his own
work. The Codex had suffered much defacement down to 908 (1502)
at the hands of "a Persian Turk of Ganj" who had interlined it
with explanations. It came to Scotland (with Erskine?) who in
1826 sent it with a covering letter (Dec. 12th, 1826), at its
owner's desire, to the Advocates' Library where it now is. In
1907 it was fully described by me in the JRAS.

Of two _Waqi'at-i-baburi_ (Pers. trs.) made in Akbar's reign,
the earlier was begun in 1583, at private instance, by two
Mughuls Payanda-hasan of Ghazni and Muhammad-quli of Hisar.
The Bodleian and British Museum Libraries have copies of it,
very fragmentary unfortunately, for it is careful, likeable,
and helpful by its small explanatory glosses. It has the great
defect of not preserving autobiographic quality in its diction.

VII

The later _Waqi'at-i-baburi_ translated by `Abdu'r-rahim Mirza
is one of the most important items in Baburiana, both by its
special characteristics as the work of a Turkman and not of a
Persian, and by the great service it has done. Its origin is
well-known; it was made at Akbar's order to help Abu'l-faẓl in
the Akbar-nāma account of Babur and also to facilitate perusal
of the _Babur-nama_ in Hindustan. It was presented to Akbar, by
its translator who had come up from Gujrat, in the last week of
November, 1589, on an occasion and at a place of admirable
fitness. For Akbar had gone to Kabul to visit Babur's tomb, and
was halting on his return journey at Barik-ab where Babur had
halted on his march down to Hindustan in the year of victory
1525, at no great distance from "Babur Padshah's Stone-heap".
Abu'l-faẓl's account of the presentation will rest on
`Abdu'r-rahim's information (A.N. trs. cap. ci). The diction of
this translation is noticeable; it gave much trouble to Erskine
who thus writes of it (_Memoirs_ Preface, lx), "Though simple
and precise, a close adherence to the idioms and forms of
expression of the Turki original joined to a want of
distinctness in the use of the relatives, often renders the
meaning extremely obscure, and makes it difficult to discover
the connexion of the different members of the sentence.[17] The
style is frequently not Persian.... Many of the Turki words are
untranslated."

Difficult as these characteristics made Erskine's
interpretation, it appears to me likely that they indirectly
were useful to him by restraining his diction to some extent in
their Turki fettering.—This Turki fettering has another aspect,
apart from Erskine's difficulties, _viz_. it would greatly
facilitate re-translation into Turki, such as has been
effected, I think, in the Farghana section of the Bukhara
compilation.[18]

VIII

This item of work, a harmless attempt of Salim (_i.e_. Jahangir
Padshah; 1605-28) to provide the ancestral autobiography with
certain stop-gaps, has caused much needless trouble and
discussion without effecting any useful result. It is this:—In
his own autobiography, the _Tuzuk-i-jahangiri s.a_. 1607, he
writes of a Babur-nama Codex he examined, that it was all in
Babur's "blessed handwriting" except four portions which were
in his own and each of which he attested in Turki as so being.
Unfortunately he did not specify his topics; unfortunately also
no attestation has been found to passages reasonably enough
attributable to his activities. His portions may consist of the
"Rescue-passage" (App. D) and a length of translation from the
_Akbar-nāma_, a continuous part of its Babur chapter but broken
up where only I have seen it, _i.e._ the Bukhara compilation,
into (1) a plain tale of Kanwa (1527), (2) episodes of Babur's
latter months (1529)—both transferred to the first person—and
(3) an account of Babur's death (December 26th, 1530) and
Court.

Jahangir's occupation, harmless in itself, led to an imbroglio
of Langlés with Erskine, for the former stating in the
_Biographie Universelle_ art. Babour, that Babour's
Commentaries "_augmentés par Jahangir_" were translated into
Persian by `Abdu'r-rahim. Erskine made answer, "I know not on
what authority the learned Langlés hazarded this assertion,
which is certainly incorrect" (_Memoirs_, Preface, p. ix). Had
Langlés somewhere met with Jahangir's attestations? He had
authority if he had seen merely the statement of 1607, but
Erskine was right also, because the Persian translation
contains no more than the unaugmented Turki text. The royal
stop-gaps are in Kehr's MS. and through Ilminski reached De
Courteille, whence the biting and thorough analysis of the
three "Fragments" by Teufel. Both episodes—the Langlés and the
Teufel ones—are time-wasters but they are comprehensible in
the circumstances that Jahangir could not foresee the
consequences of his doubtless good intentions.

If the question arise of how writings that had had place in
Jahangir's library reached Bukhara, their open road is through
the Padshah's correspondence (App. Q and references), with a
descendant of Ahrari in whose hands they were close to
Bukhara.[19]

It groups scattered information to recall that Salim (Jahangir)
was `Abdu'r-rahim's ward, that then, as now, Babur's
Autobiography was the best example of classic Turki, and that
it would appeal on grounds of piety—as it did appeal on some
sufficient ground—to have its broken story made good. Also that
for three of the four "portions" Abu'l-fazl's concise matter
was to hand.

My information concerning Baburiana under Shah-i-jahan Padshah
(1628-58) is very meagre. It consists of (1) his attestation of
a signature of Babur (App. Q and photo), (2) his possession of
Babur's autograph Codex (_Padshah-nama_, Bib. Ind. ed., ii, 4),
and (3) his acceptance, and that by his literary entourage, of
Mir Abu-talib _Husaini's_ Persian translation of Timur's
Annals, the _Malfuzat_ whose preparation the _Zafar-nama_
describes and whose link with Babur's writings is that of the
exemplar to the emulator.[20]

The Haidarabad Codex may have been inscribed under Aurang-zib
Padshah (1655-1707). So many particulars about it have been
given already that little needs saying here.[21] It was the
_grande trouvaille_ of my search for Turki text wherewith to
revive Babur's autobiography both in Turki and English. My
husband in 1900 saw it in Haidarabad; through the kind offices
of the late Sayyid Ali _Bilgrami_ it was lent to me; it proved
to surpass, both in volume and quality, all other Babur-nama
MSS. I had traced; I made its merits known to Professor Edward
Granville Browne, just when the E. J. Wilkinson Gibb Trust was
in formation, with the happy and accordant result that the best
prose book in classic Turki became the first item in the
Memorial—_matris ad filium_—of literary work done in the name
of the Turkish scholar, and Babur's very words were safeguarded
in hundred-fold facsimile. An event so important for
autobiography and for Turki literature may claim more than the
bald mention of its occurrence, because sincere autobiography,
however ancient, is human and social and undying, so that this
was no mere case of multiplying copies of a book, but was one
of preserving a man's life in his words. There were, therefore,
joyful red-letter days in the English story of the
Codex—outstanding from others being those on which its merits
revealed themselves (on Surrey uplands)—the one which brought
Professor Browne's acceptance of it for reproduction by the
Trust—and the day of pause from work marked by the accomplished
fact of the safety of the _Babur-nama._

The period from _cir._ 1700, the date of the Haidarabad Codex,
and 1810, when the Elphinstone Codex was purchased by its
sponsor at Peshawar, appears to have been unfruitful in work on
the Hindustan MSS. Causes for this may connect with historic
events, _e.g._ Nadir Shah's desolation of Dihli and the rise of
the East India Company, and, in Baburiana, with the
disappearance of Babur's autograph Codex (it was unknown to the
Scots of 1800-26), and the transfer of the Elphinstone Codex
from royal possession—this, possibly however, an accident of
royal travel to and from Kabul at earlier dates.

The first quarter of the nineteenth century was, on the
contrary, most fruitful in valuable work, useful impulse to
which was given by Dr. John Leyden who in about 1805 began to
look into Turki. Like his contemporary Julius Klaproth
(_q.v._), he was avid of tongues and attracted by Turki and by
Babur's writings of which he had some knowledge through the
`Abdu'r-rahim (Persian) translation. His Turki text-book would
be the MS. of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,[22] a part-copy of
the Bukhara compilation, from which he had the India Office MS.
copied. He took up Turki again in 1810, after his return from
Malay and whilst awaiting orders in Calcutta for departure to
Java. He sailed in the autumn of the year and died in August
1811. Much can be learned about him and his Turki occupations
from letters (_infra_ xiii) written to Erskine by him and by
others of the Scottish band which now achieved such fine
results for Babur's Autobiography.

It is necessary to say something of Leyden's part in producing
the _Memoirs_, because Erskine, desiring to "lose nothing that
might add to Leyden's reputation", has assigned to him an undue
position of collaboration in it both by giving him premier
place on its title-page and by attributing to him the beginning
the translation. What one gleans of Leyden's character makes an
impression of unassumption that would forbid his acceptance of
the posthumous position given to him, and, as his translation
shews the tyro in Turki, there can be no ground for supposing
he would wish his competence in it over-estimated. He had, as
dates show, nothing to do with the actual work of the _Memoirs_
which was finished before Erskine had seen in 1813 what Leyden
had set down before he died in 1811. As the _Memoirs_ is now a
rare book, I quote from it what Erskine says (Preface, p. ix)
of Leyden's rough translation:—"This acquisition (_i.e_. of
Leyden's trs.) reduced me to rather an awkward dilemma. The two
translations (his own and Leyden's) differed in many important
particulars; but as Dr. Leyden had the advantage of translating
from the original, I resolved to adopt his translation as far
as it went, changing only such expressions in it as seemed
evidently to be inconsistent with the context, or with other
parts of the _Memoirs_, or such as seemed evidently to
originate in the oversights that are unavoidable in an
unfinished work.[23] This labour I had completed with some
difficulty, when Mr. Elphinstone sent me the copy of the
_Memoirs of Baber_ in the original Tūrkī (_i.e._ The
Elphinstone Codex) which he had procured when he went to
Peshawar on his embassy to Kabul. This copy, which he had
supposed to have been sent with Dr. Leyden's manuscripts from
Calcutta, he was now fortunate enough to recover (in his own
library at Poona). The discovery of this valuable manuscript
reduced me, though heartily sick of the task, to the necessity
of commencing my work once more."

Erskine's Preface (pp. x, xi) contains various other references
to Leyden's work which indicate its quality as tentative and
unrevised. It is now in the British Museum Library.

XII

Little need be said here about the _Memoirs of Baber_.[24]
Erskine worked on a basis of considerable earlier acquaintance
with his Persian original, for, as his Preface tells, he had
(after Leyden's death) begun to translate this some years
before he definitely accepted the counsel of Elphinstone and
Malcolm to undertake the _Memoirs_. He finished his translation
in 1813, and by 1816 was able to dedicate his complete volume
to Elphinstone, but publication was delayed till 1826. His was
difficult pioneer-work, and carried through with the drawback
of working on a secondary source. It has done yeoman service,
of which the crowning merit is its introduction of Babur's
autobiography to the Western world.

XIII

Amongst Erskine's literary remains are several bound volumes of
letters from Elphinstone, Malcolm, Leyden, and others of that
distinguished group of Scots who promoted the revival of
Babur's writings. Erskine's grandson, the late Mr. Lestocq
Erskine, placed these, with other papers, at our disposal, and
they are now located where they have been welcomed as
appropriate additions:—Elphinstone's are in the Advocates'
Library, where already (1826) he, through Erskine, had
deposited his own Codex—and with his letters are those of
Malcolm and more occasional correspondents; Leyden's letters
(and various papers) are in the Memorial Cottage maintained in
his birthplace Denholm (Hawick) by the Edinburgh Border
Counties Association; something fitting went to the Bombay
Asiatic Society and a volume of diary to the British Museum.
Leyden's papers will help his fuller biography; Elphinstone's
letters have special value as recording his co-operation with
Erskine by much friendly criticism, remonstrance against delay,
counsels and encouragement. They, moreover, shew the estimate
an accomplished man of modern affairs formed of Babur Padshah's
character and conduct; some have been quoted in Colebrooke's
_Life of Elphinstone_, but there they suffer by detachment from
the rest of his Baburiana letters; bound together as they now
are, and with brief explanatory interpolations, they would make
a welcome item for "Babur Padshah's Book-pile".

XIV

In May 1921 the contents of these volumes were completed,
namely, the _Babur-nama in English_ and its supplements, the
aims of which are to make Babur known in English diction
answering to his _ipsissima verba_, and to be serviceable to
readers and students of his book and of classic Turki.

Of writings based upon or relating to Babur's the following
have appeared:—

Denkwurdigkeiten des Zahir-uddin Muhammad Babar—A. Kaiser
(Leipzig, 1828). This consists of extracts translated from the
Memoirs.

An abridgement of the Memoirs—R. M. Caldecott (London, 1844).

History of India—Baber and Humayun—W. Erskine (Longmans,
1854).

Babar—Rulers of India series—Stanley Lane-Poole (Oxford,
1899).

Tuzuk-i-babari or Waqi`at-i-babari (_i.e._ the Persian
trs.)—Elliot and Dowson's History of India, 1872, vol. iv.

Babur Padshah _Ghazi_—H. Beveridge (Calcutta Review, 1899).

Babur's diamond, was it the Koh-i-nur?—H. Beveridge, Asiatic
Quarterly Review, April, 1899.

Was `Abdu'r-rahim the translator of Babur's Memoirs? (_i.e._
the _Babur-nama_)—H. Beveridge, AQR., July and October, 1900.

An Empire-builder of the 16th century, Babur—Laurence F. L.
Williams (Allahabad, 1918).

Notes on the MSS. of the Turki text (_Babur-nāma_)—A. S.
Beveridge, JRAS. 1900, 1902, 1921, 1905, and Part II 1906,
1907, 1908, p. 52 and p. 828, 1909 p. 452 (_see_ Index, _s.n._
A. S. B. for topics).

[For other articles and notes by H. B. _see_ Index _s.n._]

Part III. The "Bukhara Babur-nama".

This is a singular book and has had a career as singular as its
characteristics, a very comedy of (blameless) errors and mischance. For
it is a compilation of items diverse in origin, diction, and age,
planned to be a record of the Acts of Babur and Humayun, dependent
through its Babur portion on the `Abdu'r-rahim Persian translation for
re-translation, or verbatim quotation, or dove-tailing effected on the
tattered fragments of what had once been Kamran's Codex of the
Babur-nama proper, the whole interspersed by stop-gaps attributable to
Jahangir. These and other specialities notwithstanding, it ranked for
nearly 200 years as a reproduction of Babur's authentic text, as such
was sent abroad, as such was reconstructed and printed in Kasan (1857),
translated in Paris (1871), catalogued for the Petrograd Oriental School
(1894), and for the India Office (1903).[25]

Manifest causes for the confusion of identity are, (1) lack of the
guidance in Bukhara and Petrograd of collation with the true text, (2)
want of information, in the Petrograd of 1700-25, about Babur's career,
coupled with the difficulties of communication with Bukhara, (3) the
misleading feature in the compiled book of its author's retention of the
autobiographic form of his sources, without explanation as to whether he
entered surviving fragments of Kamran's Codex, patchings or extracts
from `Abdu'r-rahim's Persian translation, or quotations of Jahangir's
stop-gaps. Of these three causes for error the first is dominant,
entailing as it does the drawbacks besetting work on an inadequate
basis.

It is necessary to enumerate the items of the Compilation here as they
are arranged in Kehr's autograph Codex, because that codex (still in
London) may not always be accessible,[26] and because the imprint does
not obey its model, but aims at closer agreement of the Bukhara
Compilation with Ilminski's gratefully acknowledged guide—_The Memoirs
of Baber_. Distinction in commenting on the Bukhara and the Kasan
versions is necessary; their discrepancy is a scene in the comedy of
errors.[27][28][29][30]

OUTLINE OF THE HISTORY OF THE COMPILATION.

An impelling cause for the production of the Bukhara compilation is
suggested by the date 1709 at which was finished the earliest example
known to me. For in the first decade of the eighteenth century Peter the
Great gave attention to Russian relations with foreign states of Central
Asia and negociated with the Khan of Bukhara for the reception of a
Russian mission.[31] Political aims would be forwarded if envoys were
familiar with Turki; books in that tongue for use in the School of
Oriental Languages would be desired; thus the Compilation may have been
prompted and, as will be shown later, it appears to have been produced,
and not merely copied, in 1709. The Mission's despatch was delayed till
1719;[32] it arrived in Bukhara in 1721; during its stay a member of its
secretariat bought a Compilation MS. noted as finished in 1714 and on a
fly-leaf of it made the following note:—

"_I, Timur-pulad son of Mirza Rajab son of Pay-chin, bought this book
Babur-nama after coming to Bukhara with [the] Russian Florio Beg
Beneveni, envoy of the Padshah ... whose army is numerous as the
stars.... May it be well received! Amen! O Lord of both Worlds!_"

Timur-pulad's hope for a good reception indicates a definite recipient,
perhaps a commissioned purchase. The vendor may have been asked for a
history of Babur; he sold one, but "Babur-nama" is not necessarily a
title, and is not suitable for the Compilation; by conversational
mischance it may have seemed so to the purchaser and thus have initiated
the mistake of confusing the "Bukhara Babur-nama" with the true one.

Thus endorsed, the book in 1725 reached the Foreign Office; there in
1737 it was obtained by George Jacob Kehr, a teacher of Turki, amongst
other languages, in the Oriental School, who copied it with meticulous
care, understanding its meaning imperfectly, in order to produce a Latin
version of it. His Latin rendering was a fiasco, but his reproduction of
the Arabic forms of his archetype was so obedient that on its sole basis
Ilminski edited the Kasan Imprint (1857). A collateral copy of the
Timur-pulad Codex was made in 1742 (as has been said).

In 1824 Klaproth (who in 1810 had made a less valuable extract perhaps
from Kehr's Codex) copied from the Timur-pulad MS. its purchaser's note,
the Auzbeg?(?) endorsement as to the transfer of the "Kamran-docket" and
Babur's letter to Kamran (_Mémoires relatifs à l'Asie_ Paris).

In 1857 Ilminski, working in Kasan, produced his imprint, which became
de Courteille's source for _Les Mémoires de Baber_ in 1871. No worker in
the above series shews doubt about accepting the Compilation as
containing Babur's authentic text. Ilminski was in the difficult
position of not having entire reliance on Kehr's transcription, a
natural apprehension in face of the quality of the Latin version, his
doubts sum up into his words that a reliable text could not be made from
his source (Kehr's MS.), but that a Turki reading-book could—and was. As
has been said, he did not obey the dual plan of the Compilation Kehr's
transcript reveals, this, perhaps, because of the misnomer Babur-nama
under which Timur-pulad's Codex had come to Petrograd; this, certainly,
because he thought a better history of Babur could be produced by
following Erskine than by obeying Kehr—a series of errors following the
verbal mischance of 1725. Ilminski's transformation of the items of his
source had the ill result of misleading Pavet de Courteille to
over-estimate his Turki source at the expense of Erskine's Persian one
which, as has been said, was Ilminski's guide—another scene in the
comedy. A mischance hampering the French work was its falling to be done
at a time when, in Paris 1871, there can have been no opportunity
available for learning the contents of Ilminski's Russian Preface or for
quiet research and the examination of collateral aids from abroad.[33]

THE AUTHOR OF THE COMPILATION.

The Haidarabad Codex having destroyed acquiescence in the phantasmal
view of the Bukhara book, the question may be considered, who was its
author?

This question a convergence of details about the Turki MSS. reputed to
contain the _Babur-nama_, now allows me to answer with some semblance of
truth. Those details have thrown new light upon a colophon which I
received in 1900 from Mr. C. Salemann with other particulars concerning
the "_Senkovski Babur-nama_," this being an extract from the
Compilation; its archetype reached Petrograd from Bukhara a century
after Kehr's [_viz._ the Timur-pulad Codex]; it can be taken as a direct
copy of the Mulla's original because it bears his colophon.[34] In 1900
I accepted it as merely that of a scribe who had copied Senkovski's
archetype, but in 1921 reviewing the colophon for this Preface, it seems
to me to be that of the original autograph MS. of the Compilation and to
tell its author's name, his title for his book, and the year (1709) in
which he completed it.

TABLE OF BUKHARA REPUTED-BABUR-NAMA MSS. (_Waqi`nama-i-padshahi?_).

Senkovski brought it over from his archetype; Mr. Salemann sent it to me
in its original Turki form. (JRAS. 1900, p. 474). Senkovski's own
colophon is as follows:—

"_J'ai achevé cette copie le 4 Mai, 1824, à St. Petersburg; elle a éte
faite d'àpres un exemplaire appartenant à Nazar Bai Turkistani,
négociant Boukhari, qui etait venu cette année à St. Petersburg. J.
Senkovski._"

The colophon Senkovski copied from his archetype is to the following
purport:—

"_Known and entitled Waqi`nama-i-padshahi (Record of Royal Acts), [this]
autograph and composition (bayad u navisht) of Mulla `Abdu'l-wahhāb the
Teacher, of Ghaj-davan in Bukhara—God pardon his mistakes and the
weakness of his endeavour!—was finished on Monday, Rajab 5, 1121 (Aug.
31st, 1709).—Thank God!_"

It will be observed that the title Waqi`nama-i-padshahi suits the plan
of dual histories (of Babur and Humayun) better than does the
"Babur-nama" of Timur-pulad's note, that the colophon does not claim for
the Mulla to have copied the elder book (1494-1530) but to have written
down and composed one under a differing title suiting its varied
contents; that the Mulla's deprecation and thanks tone better with
perplexing work, such as his was, than with the steadfast patience of a
good scribe; and that it exonerates the Mulla from suspicion of having
caused his compilation to be accepted as Babur's authentic text. Taken
with its circumstanding matters, it may be the dénoument of the play.

CHAPTER IV.

THE LEYDEN AND ERSKINE MEMOIRS OF BABER.

The fame and long literary services of the _Memoirs of Baber_ compel me
to explain why these volumes of mine contain a verbally new English
translation of the _Babur-nama_ instead of a second edition of the
_Memoirs_. My explanation is the simple one of textual values, of the
advantage a primary source has over its derivative, Babur's original
text over its Persian translation which alone was accessible to Erskine.

If the _Babur-nama_ owed its perennial interest to its valuable
multifarious matter, the _Memoirs_ could suffice to represent it, but
this it does not; what has kept interest in it alive through some four
centuries is the autobiographic presentment of an arresting personality
its whole manner, style and diction produce. It is characteristic
throughout, from first to last making known the personal quality of its
author. Obviously that quality has the better chance of surviving a
transfer of Babur's words to a foreign tongue when this can be effected
by imitation of them. To effect this was impracticable to Erskine who
did not see any example of the Turki text during the progress of his
translation work and had little acquaintance with Turki. No blame
attaches to his results; they have been the one introduction of Babur's
writings to English readers for almost a century; but it would be as
sensible to expect a potter to shape a vessel for a specific purpose
without a model as a translator of autobiography to shape the new verbal
container for Babur's quality without seeing his own. Erskine was the
pioneer amongst European workers on Baburiana—Leyden's fragment of
unrevised attempt to translate the Bukhara Compilation being a
negligible matter, notwithstanding friendship's deference to it; he had
ready to his hand no such valuable collateral help as he bequeathed to
his successors in the Memoirs volume. To have been able to help in the
renewal of his book by preparing a second edition of it, revised under
the authority of the Haidarabad Codex, would have been to me an act of
literary piety to an old book-friend; I experimented and failed in the
attempt; the wording of the Memoirs would not press back into the Turki
mould. Being what it is, sound in its matter and partly representative
of Babur himself, the all-round safer plan, one doing it the greater
honour, was to leave it unshorn of its redundance and unchanged in its
wording, in the place of worth and dignity it has held so long.

Brought to this point by experiment and failure, the way lay open to
make bee-line over intermediaries back to the fountain-head of
re-discovered Turki text preserved in the Haidarabad Codex. Thus I have
enjoyed an advantage no translator has had since `Abdu'r-rahim in 1589.

Concerning matters of style and diction, I may mention that three
distinct impressions of Babur's personality are set by his own,
Erskine's and de Courteille's words and manner. These divergencies,
while partly due to differing textual bases, may result mainly from the
use by the two Europeans of unsifted, current English and French. Their
portrayal might have been truer, there can be no doubt, if each had
restricted himself to such under-lying component of his mother-tongue as
approximates in linguistic stature to classic Turki. This probability
Erskine could not foresee for, having no access during his work to a
Turki source and no familiarity with Turki, he missed their lessoning.

Turki, as Babur writes it—terse, word-thrifty, restrained and
lucid,—comes over neatly into Anglo-Saxon English, perhaps through
primal affinities. Studying Babur's writings in verbal detail taught me
that its structure, idiom and vocabulary dictate a certain mechanism for
a translator's imitation. Such are the simple sentence, devoid of
relative phrasing, copied in the form found, whether abrupt and brief
or, ranging higher with the topic, gracious and dignified—the retention
of Babur's use of "we" and "I" and of his frequent impersonal
statement—the matching of words by their root-notion—the strict
observance of Babur's limits of vocabulary, effected by allotting to one
Turki word one English equivalent, thus excluding synonyms for which
Turki has little use because not shrinking from the repeated word;
lastly, as preserving relations of diction, the replacing of Babur's
Arabic and Persian aliens by Greek and Latin ones naturalized in
English. Some of these aids towards shaping a counterpart of Turki may
be thought small, but they obey a model and their aggregate has power to
make or mar a portrait.

(1) Of the uses of pronouns it may be said that Babur's "we" is neither
regal nor self-magnifying but is co-operative, as beseems the chief
whose volunteer and nomad following makes or unmakes his power, and who
can lead and command only by remittent consent accorded to him. His "I"
is individual. The _Memoirs_ varies much from these uses.

(2) The value of reproducing impersonal statements is seen by the
following example, one of many similar:—When Babur and a body of men,
making a long saddle-journey, halted for rest and refreshment by the
road-side; "There was drinking," he writes, but Erskine, "I drank"; what
is likely being that all or all but a few shared the local _vin du
pays_.

(3) The importance of observing Babur's limits of vocabulary needs no
stress, since any man of few words differs from any man of many.
Measured by the Babur-nama standard, the diction of the _Memoirs_ is
redundant throughout, and frequently over-coloured. Of this a pertinent
example is provided by a statement of which a minimum of seven
occurrences forms my example, namely, that such or such a man whose life
Babur sketches was vicious or a vicious person (_fisq_, _fāsiq_).
Erskine once renders the word by "vicious" but elsewhere enlarges to
"debauched, excess of sensual enjoyment, lascivious, libidinous,
profligate, voluptuous". The instances are scattered and certainly
Erskine could not feel their collective effect, but even scattered, each
does its ill-part in distorting the Memoirs portraiture of the man of
the one word.[35]

POSTSCRIPT OF THANKS.

I take with gratitude the long-delayed opportunity of finishing my book
to express the obligation I feel to the Council of the Royal Asiatic
Society for allowing me to record in the Journal my Notes on the Turki
Codices of the _Babur-nama_ begun in 1900 and occasionally appearing
till 1921. In minor convenience of work, to be able to gather those
progressive notes together and review them, has been of value to me in
noticeable matters, two of which are the finding and multiplying of the
Haidarabad Codex, and the definite clearance of the confusion which had
made the Bukhara (reputed) _Babur-nama_ be mistaken for a reproduction
of Babur's true text.

Immeasurable indeed is the obligation laid on me by the happy community
of interests which brought under our roof the translation of the
biographies of Babur, Humayun, and Akbar. What this has meant to my own
work may be surmised by those who know my husband's wide reading in many
tongues of East and West, his retentive memory and his generous
communism in knowledge. One signal cause for gratitude to him from those
caring for Baburiana, is that it was he made known the presence of the
Haidarabad Codex in its home library (1899) and thus led to its
preservation in facsimile.

It would be impracticable to enumerate all whose help I keep in grateful
memory and realize as the fruit of the genial camaraderie of letters.

ANNETTE S. BEVERIDGE.

PITFOLD, SHOTTERMILL, HASLEMERE.
_August, 1921._

THE MEMOIRS OF BABUR

SECTION I. FARGHĀNA.

In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate.

In[36] the month of Ramẓān of the year 899 (June 1494) and [Sidenote:
Ḥaidarābād MS. fol. 1b.] in the twelfth year of my age,[37] I became
ruler[38] in the country of Farghāna.

(_a. Description of Farghāna._)

Farghāna is situated in the fifth climate[39] and at the limit of
settled habitation. On the east it has Kāshghar; on the west, Samarkand;
on the south, the mountains of the Badakhshān border; on the north,
though in former times there must have been towns such as Ālmālīgh,
Ālmātū and Yāngī which in books they write Tarāz,[40] at the present
time all is desolate, no settled population whatever remaining, because
of the Mughūls and the Aūzbegs.[41]

Farghāna is a small country,[42] abounding in grain and fruits. It is
girt round by mountains except on the west, _i.e._ towards Khujand and
Samarkand, and in winter[43] an enemy can enter only on that side.

[Sidenote: Fol. 2.] The Saiḥūn River (_daryā_) commonly known as the
Water of Khujand, comes into the country from the north-east, flows
westward through it and after passing along the north of Khujand and the
south of Fanākat,[44] now known as Shāhrukhiya, turns directly north and
goes to Turkistān. It does not join any sea[45] but sinks into the
sands, a considerable distance below [the town of] Turkistān.

Farghāna has seven separate townships,[46] five on the south and two on
the north of the Saiḥūn.

Of those on the south, one is Andijān. It has a central position and is
the capital of the Farghāna country. It produces much grain, fruits in
abundance, excellent grapes and melons. In the melon season, it is not
customary to sell them out at the beds.[47] Better than the Andijān
_nāshpātī_,[48] there is none. After Samarkand and Kesh, the fort[49] of
Andijān is the largest in Mawārā'u'n-nahr (Transoxiana). It has three
gates. Its citadel (_ark_) is on its south side. Into it water goes by
nine channels; out of it, it is strange that none comes at even a single
place.[50] Round the outer edge of the ditch[51] runs a gravelled
highway; the width of this highway divides the fort from the suburbs
surrounding it.

Andijān has good hunting and fowling; its pheasants grow [Sidenote: Fol.
2b.] so surprisingly fat that rumour has it four people could not
finish one they were eating with its stew.[52]

Andijānīs are all Turks, not a man in town or bāzār but knows Turkī. The
speech of the people is correct for the pen; hence the writings of Mīr
`Alī-shīr _Nawā'ī_,[53] though he was bred and grew up in Hīrī (Harāt),
are one with their dialect. Good looks are common amongst them. The
famous musician, Khwāja Yūsuf, was an Andijānī.[54] The climate is
malarious; in autumn people generally get fever.[55]

Again, there is Aūsh (Ūsh), to the south-east, inclining to east, of
Andijān and distant from it four _yīghāch_ by road.[56] It has a fine
climate, an abundance of running waters[57] and a most beautiful spring
season. Many traditions have their rise in its excellencies.[58] To the
south-east of the walled town (_qūrghān_) lies a symmetrical mountain,
known as the Barā Koh;[59] on the top of this, Sl. Maḥmūd Khān built a
retreat (_ḥajra_) and lower down, on its shoulder, I, in 902AH.
(1496AD.) built another, having a porch. Though his lies the higher,
mine is the better placed, the whole of the town and the suburbs being
at its foot.

The Andijān torrent[60] goes to Andijān after having traversed
[Sidenote: Fol. 3.] the suburbs of Aūsh. Orchards (_bāghāt_)[61] lie
along both its banks; all the Aūsh gardens (_bāghlār_) overlook it;
their violets are very fine; they have running waters and in spring are
most beautiful with the blossoming of many tulips and roses.

On the skirt of the Barā-koh is a mosque called the Jauza Masjid (Twin
Mosque).[62] Between this mosque and the town, a great main canal flows
from the direction of the hill. Below the outer court of the mosque lies
a shady and delightful clover-meadow where every passing traveller takes
a rest. It is the joke of the ragamuffins of Aūsh to let out water from
the canal[63] on anyone happening to fall asleep in the meadow. A very
beautiful stone, waved red and white[64] was found in the Barā Koh in
`Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's latter days; of it are made knife handles, and
clasps for belts and many other things. For climate and for
pleasantness, no township in all Farghāna equals Aūsh.

Again there is Marghīnān; seven _yīghāch_[65] by road to the west of
Andijān,—a fine township full of good things. Its apricots (_aūrūk_) and
pomegranates are most excellent. One sort of pomegranate, they call the
Great Seed (_Dāna-i-kalān_); its sweetness has a little of the pleasant
flavour of the small apricot (_zard-alū_) and it may be thought better
than the Semnān pomegranate. [Sidenote: Fol. 3b.] Another kind of
apricot (_aūrūk_) they dry after stoning it and putting back the
kernel;[66] they then call it _subḥānī_; it is very palatable. The
hunting and fowling of Marghīnān are good; _āq kīyīk_[67] are had close
by. Its people are Sārts,[68] boxers, noisy and turbulent. Most of the
noted bullies (_jangralār_) of Samarkand and Bukhārā are Marghīnānīs.
The author of the Hidāyat[69] was from Rashdān, one of the villages of
Marghīnān.

Again there is Asfara, in the hill-country and nine _yīghāch_[70] by
road south-west of Marghīnān. It has running waters, beautiful little
gardens (_bāghcha_) and many fruit-trees but almonds for the most part
in its orchards. Its people are all Persian-speaking[71] Sārts. In the
hills some two miles (_bīrshar`ī_) to the south of the town, is a piece
of rock, known as the Mirror Stone.[72] It is some 10 arm-lengths
(_qārī_) long, as high as a man in parts, up to his waist in others.
Everything is reflected by it as by a mirror. The Asfara district
(_wilāyat_) is in four subdivisions (_balūk_) in the hill-country, one
Asfara, one Warūkh, one Sūkh and one Hushyār. When Muḥammad _Shaibānī_
Khān defeated Sl. Maḥmūd Khān and Alacha Khān and took Tāshkīnt and
Shāhrukhiya,[73] I went into the Sūkh and Hushyār [Sidenote: Fol. 4.]
hill-country and from there, after about a year spent in great misery, I
set out _(`azīmat_) for Kābul.[74]

Again there is Khujand,[75] twenty-five _yīghāch_ by road to the west
of Andijān and twenty-five _yīghāch_ east of Samarkand.[76] Khujand is
one of the ancient towns; of it were Shaikh Maṣlaḥat and Khwāja
Kamāl.[77] Fruit grows well there; its pomegranates are renowned for
their excellence; people talk of a Khujand pomegranate as they do of a
Samarkand apple; just now however, Marghīnān pomegranates are much met
with.[78] The walled town (_qūrghān_) of Khujand stands on high ground;
the Saiḥūn River flows past it on the north at the distance, may be, of
an arrow's flight.[79] To the north of both the town and the river lies
a mountain range called Munūghul;[80] people say there are turquoise and
other mines in it and there are many snakes. The hunting and
fowling-grounds of Khujand are first-rate; _āq kīyīk_,[81]
_būghū-marāl_,[82] pheasant and hare are all had in great plenty. The
climate is very malarious; in autumn there is much fever;[83] people
rumour it about that the very sparrows get fever and say that the cause
of the malaria is the mountain range on the north (_i.e._ Munūghul).

Kand-i-badām (Village of the Almond) is a dependency of Khujand; though
it is not a township (_qaṣba_) it is rather a good approach to one
(_qaṣbacha_). Its almonds are excellent, hence its name; they all go to
Hormuz or to Hindūstān. It is five or [Sidenote: Fol. 4b.] six
_yīghāch_[84] east of Khujand.

Between Kand-i-badām and Khujand lies the waste known as Hā Darwesh. In
this there is always (_hamesha_) wind; from it wind goes always
(_hameshā_) to Marghīnān on its east; from it wind comes continually
(_dā'im_) to Khujand on its west.[85] It has violent, whirling winds.
People say that some darweshes, encountering a whirlwind in this
desert,[86] lost one another and kept crying, "Hāy Darwesh! Hāy
Darwesh!" till all had perished, and that the waste has been called Hā
Darwesh ever since.

Of the townships on the north of the Saiḥūn River one is Akhsī. In books
they write it Akhsīkīt[87] and for this reason the poet As̤iru-d-dīn is
known as _Akhsīkītī_. After Andijān no township in Farghāna is larger
than Akhsī. It is nine _yīghāch_[88] by road to the west of Andijān.
`Umar Shaikh Mīrzā made it his capital.[89] The Saiḥūn River flows below
its walled town (_qūrghān_). This stands above a great ravine (_buland
jar_) and it has deep ravines (_`uṃiq jarlār_) in place of a moat. When
`Umar Shaikh Mīrzā made it his capital, he once or twice cut other
ravines from the outer ones. In all Farghāna no fort is so strong as
Akhsī. *Its suburbs extend some two miles further [Sidenote: Fol. 5.]
than the walled town.* People seem to have made of Akhsī the saying
(_mis̤al_), "Where is the village? Where are the trees?" (_Dih kujā?
Dirakhtān kujā?_) Its melons are excellent; they call one kind Mīr
Tīmūrī; whether in the world there is another to equal it is not known.
The melons of Bukhārā are famous; when I took Samarkand, I had some
brought from there and some from Akhsī; they were cut up at an
entertainment and nothing from Bukhārā compared with those from Akhsī.
The fowling and hunting of Akhsī are very good indeed; _āq kīyīk_ abound
in the waste on the Akhsī side of the Saihūn; in the jungle on the
Andijān side _būghū-marāl_,[90] pheasant and hare are had, all in very
good condition.

Again there is Kāsān, rather a small township to the north of Akhsī.
From Kāsān the Akhsī water comes in the same way as the Andijān water
comes from Aūsh. Kāsān has excellent air and beautiful little gardens
(_bāghcha_). As these gardens all lie along the bed of the torrent
(_sā'ī_) people call them the "fine front of the coat."[91] Between
Kāsānīs and Aūshīs there is rivalry about the beauty and climate of
their townships.

In the mountains round Farghāna are excellent summer-pastures (_yīlāq_).
There, and nowhere else, the _tabalghū_[92]grows, a tree (_yīghāch_)
with red bark; they make staves of it; they [Sidenote: Fol. 5b.] make
bird-cages of it; they scrape it into arrows;[93] it is an excellent
wood (_yīghāch_) and is carried as a rarity[94] to distant places. Some
books write that the mandrake[95] is found in these mountains but for
this long time past nothing has been heard of it. A plant called _Āyīq
aūtī_[96] and having the qualities of the mandrake (_mihr-giyāh_), is
heard of in Yītī-kīnt;[97] it seems to be the mandrake (_mihr-giyāh_)
the people there call by this name (_i.e._ _āyīq aūtī_). There are
turquoise and iron mines in these mountains.

If people do justly, three or four thousand men[98] may be maintained by
the revenues of Farghāna.

(_b. Historical narrative resumed._)[99]

As `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā was a ruler of high ambition and great pretension,
he was always bent on conquest. On several occasions he led an army
against Samarkand; sometimes he was beaten, sometimes retired against
his will.[100] More than once he asked his father-in-law into the
country, that is to say, my grandfather, Yūnas Khān, the then Khān of
the Mughūls in the camping ground (_yūrt_) of his ancestor, Chaghatāī
Khān, the second son of Chīngīz Khān. Each time the Mīrzā brought The
Khān into the Farghāna country he gave him lands, but, partly owing to
his misconduct, partly to the thwarting of the [Sidenote: Fol. 6.]
Mughūls,[101] things did not go as he wished and Yūnas Khān, not being
able to remain, went out again into Mughūlistān. When the Mīrzā last
brought The Khān in, he was in possession of Tāshkīnt, which in books
they write Shash, and sometimes Chāch, whence the term, a Chāchī,
bow.[102] He gave it to The Khān, and from that date (890AH.-1485AD.)
down to 908AH. (1503AD.) it and the Shāhrukhiya country were held by the
Chaghatāī Khāns.

At this date (_i.e._, 899AH.-1494AD.) the Mughūl Khānship was in Sl.
Maḥ=mūd Khān, Yūnas Khān's younger son and a half-brother of my mother.
As he and `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's elder brother, the then ruler of
Samarkand, Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā were offended by the Mīrzā's behaviour, they
came to an agreement together; Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā had already given a
daughter to Sl. Maḥmūd Khān;[103] both now led their armies against
`Umar Shaikh Mīrzā, the first advancing along the south of the Khujand
Water, the second along its north.

Meantime a strange event occurred. It has been mentioned [Sidenote: Fol.
6b] that the fort of Akhsī is situated above a deep ravine;[104] along
this ravine stand the palace buildings, and from it, on Monday, Ramẓān
4, (June 8th.) `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā flew, with his pigeons and their
house, and became a falcon.[105]

He was 39 (lunar) years old, having been born in Samarkand, in 860AH.
(1456AD.) He was Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā's fourth son,[106] being younger
than Sl. Aḥmad M. and Sl. Muḥammad M. and Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā. His father,
Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā, was the son of Sl. Muḥammad Mīrzā, son of Tīmūr
Beg's third son, Mīrān-shāh M. and was younger than `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā,
(the elder) and Jahāngīr M. but older than Shāhrukh Mīrzā.

_c. `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's country._

His father first gave him Kābul and, with Bābā-i-Kābulī[107] for his
guardian, had allowed him to set out, but recalled him from the Tamarisk
Valley[108] to Samarkand, on account of the Mīrzās' Circumcision Feast.
When the Feast was over, he gave him Andijān with the appropriateness
that Tīmūr Beg had given Farghāna (Andijān) to his son, the elder `Umar
Shaikh Mīrzā. This done, he sent him off with Khudāī-bīrdī _Tūghchī
Tīmūr-tāsh_[109] for his guardian.

_d. His appearance and characteristics._

He was a short and stout, round-bearded and fleshy-faced [Sidenote: Fol.
7.] person.[110] He used to wear his tunic so very tight that to fasten
the strings he had to draw his belly in and, if he let himself out after
tying them, they often tore away. He was not choice in dress or food. He
wound his turban in a fold (_dastar-pech_); all turbans were in four
folds (_chār-pech_) in those days; people wore them without twisting
and let the ends hang down.[111] In the heats and except in his Court,
he generally wore the Mughūl cap.

_e. His qualities and habits._

He was a true believer (_Ḥanafī maẕhablīk_) and pure in the Faith, not
neglecting the Five Prayers and, his life through, making up his
Omissions.[112] He read the Qur'ān very frequently and was a disciple of
his Highness Khwāja `Ubaidu'l-lāh (_Aḥrārī_) who honoured him by visits
and even called him son. His current readings[113] were the two Quintets
and the _Mas̤nawī_;[114] of histories he read chiefly the _Shāh-nāma_.
He had a poetic nature, but no taste for composing verses. He was so
just that when he heard of a caravan returning from Khitāī as
overwhelmed by snow in the mountains of Eastern Andijān,[115] and that
of its thousand heads of houses (_awīlūq_) two only had escaped, he sent
his overseers to take charge of all goods and, though no heirs were
[Sidenote: Fol. 7b.] near and though he was in want himself, summoned
the heirs from Khurāsān and Samarkand, and in the course of a year or
two had made over to them all their property safe and sound.

He was very generous; in truth, his character rose altogether to the
height of generosity. He was affable, eloquent and sweet-spoken, daring
and bold. Twice out-distancing all his braves,[116] he got to work with
his own sword, once at the Gate of Akhsī, once at the Gate of
Shāhrukhiya. A middling archer, he was strong in the fist,—not a man but
fell to his blow. Through his ambition, peace was exchanged often for
war, friendliness for hostility.

In his early days he was a great drinker, later on used to have a party
once or twice a week. He was good company, on occasions reciting verses
admirably. Towards the last he rather preferred intoxicating
confects[117] and, under their sway, used to lose his head. His
disposition[118] was amorous, and he bore many a lover's mark.[119] He
played draughts a good deal, sometimes even threw the dice.

_f. His battles and encounters._

He fought three ranged battles, the first with Yūnas Khān, [Sidenote:
Fol. 8.] on the Saiḥūn, north of Andijān, at the Goat-leap,[120] a
village so-called because near it the foot-hills so narrow the flow of
the water that people say goats leap across.[121] There he was beaten
and made prisoner. Yūnas Khān for his part did well by him and gave him
leave to go to his own district (Andijān). This fight having been at
that place, the Battle of the Goat-leap became a date in those parts.

His second battle was fought on the Urūs,[122] in Turkistān, with
Aūzbegs returning from a raid near Samarkand. He crossed the river on
the ice, gave them a good beating, separated off all their prisoners and
booty and, without coveting a single thing for himself, gave everything
back to its owners.

His third battle he fought with (his brother) Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā at a
place between Shāhrukhiya and Aūrā-tīpā, named Khwāṣ.[123] Here he was
beaten.

_g. His country._

The Farghāna country his father had given him; Tāshkīnt and Sairām, his
elder brother, Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā gave, and they were in his possession for
a time; Shāhrukhiya he took by a ruse and held awhile. Later on,
Tāshkīnt and Shāhrukhiya passed out of his hands; there then remained
the Farghāna country and Khujand,—some do not include Khujand in
[Sidenote: Fol. 8b.] Farghāna,—and Aūrā-tīpā, of which the original name
was Aūrūshnā and which some call Aūrūsh. In Aūrā-tīpā, at the time Sl.
Aḥmad Mīrzā went to Tāshkīnt against the Mughūls, and was beaten on the
Chīr[124] (893AH.-1488AD.) was Ḥafiẓ Beg _Dūldāī_; he made it over to
`Umar Shaikh M. and the Mīrzā held it from that time forth.

_h. His children._

Three of his sons and five of his daughters grew up. I, Z̤ahīru'd-dīn
Muḥammad Bābur,[125] was his eldest son; my mother was Qūtlūq-nigār
Khānīm. Jahāngīr Mīrzā was his second son, two years younger than I; his
mother, Fāṯima-sulṯān by name, was of the Mughūl _tūmān_-begs.[126]
Nāṣir Mīrzā was his third son; his mother was an Andijānī, a
mistress,[127] named Umīd. He was four years younger than I.

`Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's eldest daughter was Khān-zāda Begīm,[128] my full
sister, five years older than I. The second time I took Samarkand
(905AH.-1500AD.), spite of defeat at Sar-i-pul,[129] I went back and
held it through a five months' siege, but as no sort of help or
reinforcement came from any beg or ruler thereabouts, I left it in
despair and got away; in that throneless time (_fatrat_) Khān-zāda Begīm
fell[130] to Muḥammad _Shaibānī_ Khān. She had one child by him, a
pleasant boy,[131] [Sidenote: Fol. 9.] named Khurram Shāh. The Balkh
country was given to him; he went to God's mercy a few years after the
death of his father (916AH.-1510AD.). Khān-zāda Begīm was in Merv when
Shāh Ismā`īl (_Ṣafawī_) defeated the Aūzbegs near that town
(916AH.-1510AD.); for my sake he treated her well, giving her a
sufficient escort to Qūndūz where she rejoined me. We had been apart for
some ten years; when Muḥammadī _kūkūldāsh_ and I went to see her,
neither she nor those about her knew us, although I spoke. They
recognized us after a time.

Mihr-bānū Begīm was another daughter, Nāṣir Mīrzā's full-sister, two
years younger than I. Shahr-bānū Begīm was another, also Nāṣir Mīrzā's
full-sister, eight years younger than I. Yādgār-sulṯān Begīm was
another, her mother was a mistress, called Āghā-sulṯān. Ruqaiya-sulṯān
Begīm was another; her mother, Makhdūm-sulṯān Begīm, people used to call
the Dark-eyed Begīm. The last-named two were born after the Mīrzā's
death. Yādgār-sulṯān Begīm was brought up by my grandmother,
Aīsān-daulat Begīm; she fell to `Abdu'l-laṯīf Sl., a son of Ḥamza Sl.
when Shaibānī Khān took Andijān and Akhsī (908AH.-1503AD.). She rejoined
me when (917AH.-1511AD.) in Khutlān I defeated Ḥamza Sl. and other
sulṯāns and took Ḥiṣār. Ruqaiya-sulṯān Begīm fell in that [Sidenote:
Fol. 9b.] same throneless time (_fatrat_) to Jānī Beg Sl. (_Aūzbeg_). By
him she had one or two children who did not live. In these days of our
leisure (_furṣatlār_)[132] has come news that she has gone to God's
mercy.

_i. His ladies and mistresses._

Qūtlūq-nigār Khānīm was the second daughter of Yūnas Khān and the eldest
(half-) sister of Sl. Maḥmūd Khān and Sl. Aḥmad Khān.

(_j. Interpolated account of Bābur's mother's family._)

Yūnas Khān descended from Chaghatāī Khān, the second son of Chīngīz Khān
(as follows,) Yūnas Khān, son of Wais Khān, son of Sher-`alī _Aūghlān_,
son of Muḥammad Khān, son of Khiẓr Khwāja Khān, son of Tūghlūq-tīmūr
Khān, son of Aīsān-būghā Khān, son of Dāwā Khān, son of Barāq Khān, son
of Yīsūntawā Khān, son of Mūātūkān, son of Chaghatāī Khān, son of
Chīngīz Khān.

Since such a chance has come, set thou down[133] now a summary of the
history of the Khāns.

Yūnas Khān (d. 892 AH.-1487 AD.) and Aīsān-būghā Khān (d. 866 AH.-1462
AD.) were sons of Wais Khān (d. 832 AH.-1428 AD.).[134] Yūnas Khān's
mother was either a daughter or a grand-daughter of Shaikh Nūru'd-dīn
Beg, a Turkistānī Qīpchāq favoured by Tīmūr Beg. When Wais Khān died,
the Mughūl horde split in two, one portion being for Yūnas Khān, the
greater for Aīsān-būghā Khān. For help in getting the upper hand in the
horde, Aīrzīn (var. Aīrāzān) one of the Bārīn _tūmān_-begs and Beg Mīrik
_Turkmān_, one of the Chīrās _tūmān_-begs, took Yūnas Khān (aet. 13) and
with him [Sidenote: Fol. 10.] three or four thousand Mughūl heads of
houses (_awīlūq_), to Aūlūgh Beg Mīrzā (_Shāhrukhī_) with the
fittingness that Aūlūgh Beg M. had taken Yūnas Khān's elder sister for
his son, `Abdu'l-`azīz Mīrzā. Aūlūgh Beg Mīrzā did not do well by them;
some he imprisoned, some scattered over the country[135] one by one. The
Dispersion of Aīrzīn became a date in the Mughūl horde.

Yūnas Khān himself was made to go towards `Irāq; one year he spent in
Tabrīz where Jahān Shāh _Barānī_ of the Black Sheep Turkmāns was ruling.
From Tabrīz he went to Shīrāz where was Shāhrukh Mīrzā's second son,
Ibrāhīm Sulṯān Mīrzā.[136] He having died five or six months later
(Shawwal 4, 838 AH.-May 3rd, 1435 AD.), his son, `Abdu'l-lāh Mīrzā sat
in his place. Of this `Abdu'l-lāh Mīrzā Yūnas Khān became a retainer and
to him used to pay his respects. The Khān was in those parts for 17 or
18 years.

In the disturbances between Aūlūgh Beg Mīrzā and his sons, Aīsān-būghā
Khān found a chance to invade Farghāna; he plundered as far as
Kand-i-badām, came on and, having plundered Andijān, led all its people
into captivity.[137] Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā, after seizing the throne of
Samarkand, led an army out to beyond Yāngī (Tarāz) to Aspara in
Mughūlistān, [Sidenote: Fol. 10b.] there gave Aīsān-būghā a good beating
and then, to spare himself further trouble from him and with the
fittingness that he had just taken to wife[138] Yūnas Khān's elder
sister, the former wife of `Abdu'l-`azīz Mīrzā (_Shāhrukhī_), he invited
Yūnas Khān from Khurāsān and `Irāq, made a feast, became friends and
proclaimed him Khān of the Mughūls. Just when he was speeding him forth,
the Sāghārīchī _tūmān_-begs had all come into Mughūlistān, in anger with
Aīsān-būghā Khān.[139] Yūnas Khān went amongst them and took to wife
Aīsān-daulat Begīm, the daughter of their chief, `Alī-shīr Beg. They
then seated him and her on one and the same white felt and raised him to
the Khānship.[140]

By this Aīsān-daulat Begīm, Yūnas Khān had three daughters. Mihr-nigār
Khānīm was the eldest; Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā set her aside[141] for his
eldest son, Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā; she had no child. In a throneless time (905
AH.) she fell to Shaibānī Khān; she left Samarkand[142] with Shāh Begīm
for Khurāsān (907 AH.) and both came on to me in Kābul (911 AH.). At the
time Shaibānī Khān was besieging Nāṣir Mīrzā in Qandahār and I set out
for Lamghān[143] (913 AH.) they went to Badakhshān with Khān Mīrzā
(Wais).[144] When Mubārak Shāh invited Khān Mīrzā into Fort
Victory,[145] they were [Sidenote: Fol. 11.] captured, together with the
wives and families of all their people, by marauders of Ābā-bikr
_Kāshgharī_ and, as captives to that ill-doing miscreant, bade farewell
to this transitory world (_circa_ 913 AH.-1507 AD.).

Qūtlūq-nigār Khānīm, my mother, was Yūnas Khān's second daughter. She
was with me in most of my guerilla expeditions and throneless times. She
went to God's mercy in Muḥarram 911 AH. (June 1505 AD.) five or six
months after the capture of Kābul.

Khūb-nigār Khānīm was his third daughter. Her they gave to Muḥammad
Ḥusain _Kūrkān Dūghlāt_ (899 AH.). She had one son and one daughter by
him. `Ubaid Khān (_Aūzbeg_) took the daughter (Ḥabība).[146] When I
captured Samarkand and Bukhārā (917 AH.-1511 AD.), she stayed
behind,[147] and when her paternal uncle, Sayyid Muḥammad _Dūghlāt_ came
as Sl. Sa`īd Khān's envoy to me in Samarkand, she joined him and with
him went to Kāshghar where (her cousin), Sl. Sa`īd Khān took her.
Khūb-nigār's son was Ḥaidar Mīrzā.[148] He was in my service for three
or four years after the Aūzbegs slew his father, then (918 AH.-1512 AD.)
asked leave to go to Kāshghar to the presence of Sl. Sa`īd Khān.

"Everything goes back to its source.
Pure gold, or silver or tin."[149]

People say he now lives lawfully (_tā'ib_) and has found the right way
(_ṯarīqā_).[150] He has a hand deft in everything, penmanship and
painting, and in making arrows and arrow-barbs [Sidenote: Fol. 11b.] and
string-grips; moreover he is a born poet and in a petition written to
me, even his style is not bad.[151]

Shāh Begīm was another of Yūnas Khān's ladies. Though he had more, she
and Aīsān-daulat Begīm were the mothers of his children. She was one of
the (six) daughters of Shāh Sulṯān Muḥammad, Shāh of Badakhshān.[152]
His line, they say, runs back to Iskandar Fīlkūs.[153] Sl. Abū-sa`īd
Mīrzā took another daughter and by her had Ābā-bikr Mīrzā.[154] By this
Shāh Begīm Yūnas Khān had two sons and two daughters. Her first-born
but younger than all Aīsān-daulat Begīm's daughters, was Sl. Maḥmūd
Khān, called Khānika Khān[155] by many in and about Samarkand. Next
younger than he was Sl. Aḥmad Khān, known as Alacha Khān. People say he
was called this because he killed many Qālmāqs on the several occasions
he beat them. In the Mughūl and Qālmāq tongues, one who will kill
(_aūltūrgūchī_) is called _ālāchī_; Alāchī they called him therefore and
this by repetition, became Alacha.[156] As occasion arises, the acts and
circumstances of these two Khāns will find mention in this history
(_tārīkh_).

Sulṯān-nigār Khānīm was the youngest but one of Yūnas Khān's children.
Her they made go forth (_chīqārīb īdīlār_) [Sidenote: Fol. 12.] to Sl.
Maḥmūd Mīrzā; by him she had one child, Sl. Wais (Khān Mīrzā), mention
of whom will come into this history. When Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā died (900
AH.-1495 AD.), she took her son off to her brothers in Tāshkīnt without
a word to any single person. They, a few years later, gave her to Adik
(Aūng) Sulṯān,[157] a Qāzāq sulṯān of the line of Jūjī Khān, Chīngīz
Khān's eldest son. When Shaibānī Khān defeated the Khāns (her brothers),
and took Tāshkīnt and Shāhrukhiya (908 AH.), she got away with 10 or 12
of her Mughūl servants, to (her husband), Adik Sulṯān. She had two
daughters by Adik Sulṯān; one she gave to a Shaibān sulṯān, the other to
Rashīd Sulṯān, the son of (her cousin) Sl. Sa`īd Khān. After Adik
Sulṯān's death, (his brother), Qāsim Khān, Khān of the Qāzāq horde, took
her.[158] Of all the Qāzāq khāns and sulṯāns, no one, they say, ever
kept the horde in such good order as he; his army was reckoned at
300,000 men. On his death the Khānīm went to Sl. Sa`īd Khān's presence
in Kāshghar. Daulat-sulṯān Khānīm was Yūnas Khān's youngest child.
[Sidenote: Fol. 12b.] In the Tāshkīnt disaster (908 AH.) she fell to
Tīmūr Sulṯān, the son of Shaibānī Khān. By him she had one daughter;
they got out of Samarkand with me (918 AH.-1512 AD.), spent three or
four years in the Badakhshān country, then went (923 AH.-1420 AD.) to
Sl. Sa`īd Khān's presence in Kāshghar.[159]

(_k. Account resumed of Bābur's father's family._)

In `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's _ḥaram_ was also Aūlūs Āghā, a daughter of
Khwāja Ḥusain Beg; her one daughter died in infancy and they sent her
out of the _ḥaram_ a year or eighteen months later. Fāṯima-sulṯān Āghā
was another; she was of the Mughūl _tūmān_-begs and the first taken of
his wives. Qarāgūz (Makhdūm sulṯān) Begīm was another; the Mīrzā took
her towards the end of his life; she was much beloved, so to please him,
they made her out descended from (his uncle) Minūchihr Mīrzā, the elder
brother of Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā. He had many mistresses and concubines;
one, Umīd Āghāchā died before him. Latterly there were also Tūn-sulṯān
(var. Yun) of the Mughūls and Āghā Sulṯān.

_l. `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's Amīrs._

There was Khudāī-bīrdī _Tūghchī Tīmūr-tāsh_, a descendant of the brother
of Āq-būghā Beg, the Governor of Hīrī (Herāt, for Timūr Beg.) When Sl.
Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā, after besieging Jūkī Mīrzā (_Shāhrukhī_) in Shāhrukhiya
(868AH.-1464AD.) gave the Farghāna country to `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā, he put
this Khudāī-bīrdī [Sidenote: Fol. 13.] Beg at the head of the Mīrzā's
Gate.[160] Khudāī-bīrdī was then 25 but youth notwithstanding, his
rules and management were very good indeed. A few years later when
Ibrāhīm _Begchīk_ was plundering near Aūsh, he followed him up, fought
him, was beaten and became a martyr. At the time, Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā was in
the summer pastures of Āq Qāchghāī, in Aūrā-tīpā, 18 _yīghāch_ east of
Samarkand, and Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā was at Bābā Khākī, 12 _yīghāch_ east
of Hīrī. People sent the news post-haste to the Mīrzā(s),[161] having
humbly represented it through `Abdu'l-wahhāb _Shaghāwal_. In four days
it was carried those 120 _yīghāch_ of road.[162]

Ḥāfiẓ Muḥammad Beg _Dūldāī_ was another, Sl. Malik _Kāshgharī's_ son and
a younger brother of Aḥmad Ḥājī Beg. After the death of Khudāī-bīrdī
Beg, they sent him to control `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's Gate, but he did not
get on well with the Andijān begs and therefore, when Sl. Abū-sa`īd
Mīrzā died, went to Samarkand and took service with Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā. At
the time of the disaster on the Chīr, he was in Aūrā-tīpā and made it
over to `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā when the Mīrzā passed through on his way to
Samarkand, himself taking [Sidenote: Fol. 13b.] service with him. The
Mīrzā, for his part, gave him the Andijān Command. Later on he went to
Sl. Maḥmūd Khān in Tāshkīnt and was there entrusted with the
guardianship of Khān Mīrzā (Wais) and given Dīzak. He had started for
Makka by way of Hind before I took Kābul (910AH. Oct. 1504AD.), but he
went to God's mercy on the road. He was a simple person, of few words
and not clever.

Khwāja Ḥusain Beg was another, a good-natured and simple person. It is
said that, after the fashion of those days, he used to improvise very
well at drinking parties.[163]

Shaikh Mazīd Beg was another, my first guardian, excellent in rule and
method. He must have served (_khidmat qīlghān dūr_) under Bābur Mīrzā
(_Shāhrukhī_). There was no greater beg in `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's
presence. He was a vicious person and kept catamites.

`Alī-mazīd _Qūchīn_ was another;[164] he rebelled twice, once at Akhsī,
once at Tāshkīnt. He was disloyal, untrue to his salt, vicious and
good-for-nothing.

Ḥasan (son of) Yaq`ūb was another, a small-minded, good-tempered, smart
and active man. This verse is his:—

"Return, O Huma, for without the parrot-down of thy lip,
The crow will assuredly soon carry off my bones."[165]

[Sidenote: Fol. 14.] He was brave, a good archer, played polo
(_chaughān_) well and leapt well at leap-frog.[166] He had the control
of my Gate after `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's accident. He had not much sense,
was narrow-minded and somewhat of a strife-stirrer.

Qāsim Beg _Qūchīn_, of the ancient army-begs of Andijān, was another. He
had the control of my Gate after Ḥasan Yaq`ūb Beg. His life through, his
authority and consequence waxed without decline. He was a brave man;
once he gave some Aūzbegs a good beating when he overtook them raiding
near Kāsān; his sword hewed away in `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's presence; and
in the fight at the Broad Ford (Yāsī-kījīt _circa_ 904AH.-July, 1499AD.)
he hewed away with the rest. In the guerilla days he went to Khusrau
Shāh (907AH.) at the time I was planning to go from the Macha
hill-country[167] to Sl. Maḥmūd Khān, but he came back to me in 910AH.
(1504AD.) and I shewed him all my old favour and affection. When I
attacked the Turkmān Hazāra raiders in Dara-i-khwush (911AH.) he made
better advance, spite of his age, than the younger men; I gave him
Bangash as a reward and later on, after returning to Kābul, made him
Humāyūn's guardian. He went to God's mercy [Sidenote: Fol. 14b.] about
the time Zamīn-dāwar was taken (_circa_ 928AH.-1522AD.). He was a pious,
God-fearing Musalmān, an abstainer from doubtful aliments; excellent in
judgment and counsel, very facetious and, though he could neither read
nor write (_ummiy_), used to make entertaining jokes.

Bābā Beg's Bābā Qulī (`Alī) was another, a descendant of Shaikh `Alī
_Bahādur_.[168] They made him my guardian when Shaikh Mazīd Beg died. He
went over to Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā when the Mīrzā led his army against Andijān
(899AH.), and gave him Aūrā-tīpā. After Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā's death, he
left Samarkand and was on his way to join me (900AH.) when Sl. `Alī
Mīrzā, issuing out of Aūrā-tīpā, fought, defeated and slew him. His
management and equipment were excellent and he took good care of his
men. He prayed not; he kept no fasts; he was like a heathen and he was a
tyrant.

`Alī-dost T̤aghāī[169] was another, one of the Sāghārīchī _tumān_-begs
and a relation of my mother's mother, Aīsān-daulat Begīm. I favoured him
more than he had been favoured in `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's time. People
said, "Work will come from his hand." But in the many years he was
in my presence, no work to speak of[170] came to sight. He must have
served Sl. [Sidenote: Fol. 15.] Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā. He claimed to have
power to bring on rain with the jade-stone. He was the Falconer
(_qūshchī_),worthless by nature and habit, a stingy, severe,
strife-stirring person, false, self-pleasing, rough of tongue and
cold-of-face.

Wais _Lāgharī_,[171] one of the Samarkand _Tūghchī_ people, was another.
Latterly he was much in `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's confidence; in the guerilla
times he was with me. Though somewhat factious, he was a man of good
judgment and counsel.

Mīr Ghiyās̤ T̤aghāi was another, a younger brother of `Ali-dost T̤aghāī.
No man amongst the leaders in Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā's Gate was more to the
front than he; he had charge of the Mīrzā's square seal[172] and was
much in his confidence latterly. He was a friend of Wais _Lāgharī_. When
Kāsān had been given to Sl. Maḥmūd Khān (899AH.-1494AD. ), he was
continuously in The Khān's service and was in high favour. He was a
laugher, a joker and fearless in vice.

`Ali-darwesh _Khurāsānī_ was another. He had served in the Khurāsān
Cadet Corps, one of two special corps of serviceable young men formed by
Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā when he first began [Sidenote: Fol. 15b.] to arrange
the government of Khurāsān and Samarkand, and, presumably, called by him
the Khurāsān Corps and the Samarkand Corps. `Alī-darwesh was a brave
man; he did well in my presence at the Gate of Bīshkārān.[173] He wrote
the _naskh ta`līq_ hand clearly.[174] His was the flatterer's tongue and
in his character avarice was supreme.

Qaṃbar-`alī _Mughūl_ of the Equerries (_akhtachī_) was another. People
called him The Skinner because his father, on first coming into the
(Farghāna) country, worked as a skinner. Qaṃbar-`alī had been Yūnas
Khān's water-bottle bearer,[175] later on he became a beg. Till he was a
made man, his conduct was excellent; once arrived, he was slack. He was
full of talk and of foolish talk,—a great talker is sure to be a foolish
one,—his capacity was limited and his brain muddy.

(_l. Historical narrative._)

At the time of `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's accident, I was in the Four Gardens
(_Chār-bāgh_) of Andijān.[176] The news reached Andijān on Tuesday,
Ramẓan 5 (June 9th); I mounted at once, with my followers and retainers,
intending to go into the fort but, on our getting near the Mīrzā's Gate,
Shīrīm T̤aghāī[177] took hold of my bridle and moved off towards the
Praying Place.[178] It had crossed his mind that if a great ruler like
Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā came in force, the Andijān begs would make over to him
[Sidenote: Fol. 16.] me and the country,[179] but that if he took me to
Aūzkīnt and the foothills thereabouts, I, at any rate, should not be
made over and could go to one of my mother's (half-) brothers, Sl.
Maḥmūd Khān or Sl. Aḥmad Khān.[180] When Khwāja Maulānā-i-qāẓī[181] and
the begs in the fort heard of (the intended departure), they sent after
us Khwāja Muḥammad, the tailor,[184] an old servant (_bāyrī_) of my
father and the foster-father of one of his daughters. He dispelled our
fears and, turning back from near the Praying [Sidenote: Fol. 16b.]
Place, took me with him into the citadel (_ark_) where I dismounted.
Khwāja Maulānā-i-qāẓī and the begs came to my presence there and after
bringing their counsels to a head,[185] busied themselves in making good
the towers and ramparts of the fort.[186] A few days later, Ḥasan, son
of Yaq`ūb, and Qāsim _Qūchīn_, arrived, together with other begs who had
been sent to reconnoitre in Marghīnān and those parts.[187] They also,
after waiting on me, set themselves with one heart and mind and with
zeal and energy, to hold the fort.

(_Author's note on Khwāja Maulānā-i-qāẓī._) He was the son of
Sl. Aḥmad Qāẓī, of the line of Burhānu'd-dīn `Alī
_Qīlīch_[182] and through his mother, traced back to Sl. Aīlīk
_Māẓī_.[183] By hereditary right (_yūsūnlūq_) his high family
(_khānwādalār_) must have come to be the Refuge (_marji`_) and
Pontiffs (_Shaikhu'l-islām_) of the (Farghāna) country.

Meantime Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā took Aūrā-tīpā, Khujand and Marghīnān, came on
to Qabā,[188] 4 _yīghāch_ from Andijān and there made halt. At this
crisis, Darwesh Gau, one of the Andijān notables, was put to death on
account of his improper proposals; his punishment crushed the rest.

Khwāja Qāẓī and Aūzūn (Long) Ḥasan,[189] (brother) of Khwāja Ḥusain,
were then sent to Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā to say in effect that, as he himself
would place one of his servants in the country and as I was myself both
a servant and (as) a son, he would attain his end most readily and
easily if he entrusted the service to me. He was a mild, weak man, of
few words who, without his begs, decided no opinion or compact (_aun_),
action or move; they paid attention to our proposal, gave it a harsh
answer and moved forward.

But the Almighty God, who, of His perfect power and without mortal aid,
has ever brought my affairs to their right issue, made such things
happen here that they became disgusted at having advanced (_i.e._ from
Qabā), repented indeed that they had ever set out on this expedition and
turned back with nothing done.

One of those things was this: Qabā has a stagnant, morass-like
Water,[190] passable only by the bridge. As they were many, there was
crowding on the bridge and numbers of horses and [Sidenote: Fol. 17.]
camels were pushed off to perish in the water. This disaster recalling
the one they had had three or four years earlier when they were badly
beaten at the passage of the Chīr, they gave way to fear. Another thing
was that such a murrain broke out amongst their horses that, massed
together, they began to die off in bands.[191] Another was that they
found in our soldiers and peasants a resolution and single-mindedness
such as would not let them flinch from making offering of their
lives[192] so long as there was breath and power in their bodies. Need
being therefore, when one _yīghāch_ from Andijān, they sent Darwesh
Muḥammad Tarkhān[193] to us; Ḥasan of Yaq'ūb went out from those in the
fort; the two had an interview near the Praying Place and a sort of
peace was made. This done, Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā's force retired.

Meantime Sl. Maḥmūd Khān had come along the north of the Khujand Water
and laid siege to Akhsī.[194] In Akhsī was Jahāngīr Mīrzā (aet. 9) and
of begs, `Alī-darwesh Beg, Mīrzā Qulī _Kūkūldāsh_, Muḥ. Bāqir Beg and
Shaikh `Abdu'l-lāh, Lord of the Gate. Wais _Lāgharī_ and Mīr Ghiyās̤
T̤aghāī had been there too, but being afraid of the (Akhsī) begs had
gone off to Kāsān, Wais _Lāgharī's_ district, where, he being Nāṣir
Mīrzā's guardian, the Mīrzā was.[195] They went over to Sl. Maḥmūd Khān
when he got near Akhsī; Mīr Ghiyās̤ entered his service; [Sidenote: Fol.
17b.] Wais _Lāgharī_ took Nāṣir Mīrzā to Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā, who entrusted
him to Muh. Mazīd Tarkhān's charge. The Khān, though he fought several
times near Akhsī, could not effect anything because the Akhsī begs and
braves made such splendid offering of their lives. Falling sick, being
tired of fighting too, he returned to his own country (_i.e._ Tāshkīnt).

For some years, Ābā-bikr _Kāshgharī Dūghlāt_,[196] bowing the head to
none, had been supreme in Kāshgar and Khutan. He now, moved like the
rest by desire for my country, came to the neighbourhood of Aūzkīnt,
built a fort and began to lay the land waste. Khwāja Qāzī and several
begs were appointed to drive him out. When they came near, he saw
himself no match for such a force, made the Khwāja his mediator and, by
a hundred wiles and tricks, got himself safely free.

Throughout these great events, `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's former begs and
braves had held resolutely together and made daring offer of their
lives. The Mīrzā's mother, Shāh Sulṯān Begīm,[197] and Jaḥāngīr Mīrzā
and the _ḥaram_ household and the begs came from Akhsī to Andijān; the
customary mourning was fulfilled and food and victuals spread for the
poor and destitute.[198]

[Sidenote: Fol. 18.] In the leisure from these important matters,
attention was given to the administration of the country and the
ordering of the army. The Andijān Government and control of my Gate were
settled (_mukarrar_) for Ḥasan (son) of Yaq'ūb; Aūsh was decided on
(_qarār_) for Qāsim _Qūchīn_; Akhsī and Marghīnān assigned (_ta'īn_) to
Aūzun Ḥasan and `Alī-dost T̤aghāī. For the rest of `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā's
begs and braves, to each according to his circumstances, were settled
and assigned district (_wilāyat_) or land (_yīr_) or office (_mauja_) or
charge (_jīrga_) or stipend (_wajh_).

When Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā had gone two or three stages on his return-march,
his health changed for the worse and high fever appeared. On his
reaching the Āq Sū near Aūrā-tīpā, he bade farewell to this transitory
world, in the middle of Shawwāl of the date 899 (mid July 1494 AD.)
being then 44 (lunar) years old.

_m. Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā's birth and descent._

He was born in 855 AH. (1451 AD.) the year in which his father took the
throne (_i.e._ Samarkand). He was Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā's eldest son; his
mother was a daughter of Aūrdū-būghā Tarkhān (_Arghūn_), the elder
sister of Darwesh Muḥammad Tarkhān, and the most honoured of the Mīrzā's
wives.

_n. His appearance and habits._

He was a tall, stout, brown-bearded and red-faced man. He had beard on
his chin but none on his cheeks. He had very [Sidenote: Fol. 18b.]
pleasing manners. As was the fashion in those days, he wound his turban
in four folds and brought the end forward over his brows.

_o. His characteristics and manners._

He was a True Believer, pure in the Faith; five times daily, without
fail, he recited the Prayers, not omitting them even on drinking-days.
He was a disciple of his Highness Khwāja `Ubaidu'l-lāh (_Aḥrārī_), his
instructor in religion and the strengthener of his Faith. He was very
ceremonious, particularly when sitting with the Khwāja. People say he
never drew one knee over the other[199] at any entertainment of the
Khwāja. On one occasion contrary to his custom, he sat with his feet
together. When he had risen, the Khwāja ordered the place he had sat in
to be searched; there they found, it may have been, a bone.[200] He had
read nothing whatever and was ignorant (_`amī_), and though town-bred,
unmannered and homely. Of genius he had no share. He was just and as his
Highness the Khwāja was there, accompanying him step by step,[201] most
of his affairs found lawful settlement. He was true and faithful to his
vow and word; nothing was ever seen to the contrary. He had courage, and
though he never happened to get in his own hand to work, gave sign of
it, they say, in some of his encounters. [Sidenote: Fol. 19.] He drew a
good bow, generally hitting the duck[202] both with his arrows (_aūq_)
and his forked-arrows (_tīr-giz_), and, as a rule, hit the gourd[203] in
riding across the lists (_maidān_). Latterly, when he had grown stout,
he used to take quail and pheasant with the goshawks,[204] rarely
failing. A sportsman he was, hawking mostly and hawking well; since
Aūlūgh Beg Mīrzā, such a sporting _pādshāh_ had not been seen. He was
extremely decorous; people say he used to hide his feet even in the
privacy of his family and amongst his intimates. Once settled down to
drink, he would drink for 20 or 30 days at a stretch; once risen, would
not drink again for another 20 or 30 days. He was a good drinker;[205]
on non-drinking days he ate without conviviality (_basīṯ_). Avarice was
dominant in his character. He was kindly, a man of few words whose will
was in the hands of his begs.

_p. His battles._

He fought four battles. The first was with Ni'mat _Arghūn_, Shaikh Jamāl
_Arghūn's_ younger brother, at Āqār-tūzī, near Zamīn. This he won. The
second was with `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā at Khwaṣ; this also he won. The third
affair was when he encountered Sl. Maḥmūd Khān on the Chīr, near
Tāshkīnt [Sidenote: Fol. 19b.](895 AH.-1469 AD.). There was no real
fighting, but some Mughūl plunderers coming up, by ones and twos, in his
rear and laying hands on his baggage, his great army, spite of its
numbers, broke up without a blow struck, without an effort made,
without a coming face to face, and its main body was drowned in the
Chīr.[206] His fourth affair was with Ḥaidar _Kūkūldāsh_ (_Mughūl_),
near Yār-yīlāq; here he won.

_q. His country._

Samarkand and Bukhārā his father gave him; Tāshkīnt and Sairām he took
and held for a time but gave them to his younger brother, `Umar Shaikh
Mīrzā, after `Abdu'l-qadūs (_Dūghlāt_) slew Shaikh Jamāl (_Arghūn_);
Khujand and Aūrātīpā were also for a time in his possession.

_r. His children._

His two sons did not live beyond infancy. He had five daughters, four by
Qātāq Begīm.[207]

Rābi`a-sulṯān Begīm, known as the Dark-eyed Begīm, was his eldest. The
Mīrzā himself made her go forth to Sl. Maḥmūd Khān;[208] she had one
child, a nice little boy, called Bābā Khān. The Aūzbegs killed him and
several others of age as unripe as his when they martyred (his father)
The Khān, in Khujand, (914 AH.-1508 AD.). At that time she fell to Jānī
Beg Sulṯān (_Aūzbeg_). [Sidenote: Fol. 20.]

Ṣāliḥa-sulṯān (Ṣalīqa) Begīm was his second daughter; people called her
the Fair Begīm. Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā, after her father's death, took her for
his eldest son, Sl. Mas`ūd Mīrzā and made the wedding feast (900 AH.).
Later on she fell to the Kāshgharī with Shāh Begīm and Mihr-nigār
Khānim.

`Āyisha-sulṯān Begīm was the third. When I was five and went to
Samarkand, they set her aside for me; in the guerilla times[209] she
came to Khujand and I took her (905 AH.); her one little daughter, born
after the second taking of Samarkand, went in a few days to God's mercy
and she herself left me at the instigation of an older sister.

Sulṯānīm Begīm was the fourth daughter; Sl. `Alī Mīrzā took her; then
Tīmūr Sulṯān (_Aūzbeg_) took her and after him, Mahdī Sulṯān (_Aūzbeg_).

Ma`sūma-sulṯān Begīm was the youngest of Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā's daughters.
Her mother, Ḥabība-sulṯān Begīm, was of the Arghūns, a daughter of Sl.
Ḥusain _Arghūn's_ brother. I saw her when I went to Khurāsān (912
AH.-1506 AD.), liked her, asked for her, had her brought to Kābul and
took her (913 AH.-1507 AD.). She had one daughter and there and then,
went to God's mercy, through the pains of the birth. Her name was at
once given to her child.

_s. His ladies and mistresses._

Mihr-nigār Khānīm was his first wife, set aside for him by his father,
Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā. She was Yūnas Khān's eldest [Sidenote: Fol. 20b.]
daughter and my mother's full-sister.

Tarkhān Begīm of the Tarkhāns was another of his wives.

Qātāq Begīm was another, the foster-sister of the Tarkhān Begīm just
mentioned. Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā took her _par amours_ (_`āshiqlār bīlā_): she
was loved with passion and was very dominant. She drank wine. During the
days of her ascendancy (_tīrīklīk_), he went to no other of his _ḥaram_;
at last he took up a proper position (_aūlnūrdī_) and freed himself from
his reproach.[210]

Khān-zāda Begīm, of the Tīrmīẕ Khāns, was another. He had just taken her
when I went, at five years old, to Samarkand; her face was still veiled
and, as is the Turkī custom, they told me to uncover it.[211]

Laṯīf Begīm was another, a daughter's child of Aḥmad Ḥājī Beg _Dūldāī_
(_Barlās_). After the Mīrzā's death, Ḥamza Sl. took her and she had
three sons by him. They with other sulṯāns' children, fell into my hands
when I took Ḥiṣār (916 AH.-1510 AD.) after defeating Ḥamza Sulṯān and
Tīmūr Sulṯān. I set all free.

Ḥabība-sulṯān Begīm was another, a daughter of the brother of Sl. Ḥusain
_Arghūn_.

_t. His amīrs._

Jānī Beg _Dūldāī_ (_Barlās_) was a younger brother of Sl. Malik
_Kāshgharī_. Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā gave him the Government of Samarkand
and Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā gave him the control of his own Gate.[212] He must
have had singular habits and [Sidenote: Fol. 21.] manners;[213] many
strange stories are told about him. One is this:—While he was Governor
in Samarkand, an envoy came to him from the Aūzbegs renowned, as it
would seem, for his strength. An Aūzbeg, is said to call a strong man a
bull (_būkuh_). "Are you a _būkuh_?" said Jānī Beg to the envoy, "If you
are, come, let's have a friendly wrestle together (_kūrāshālīng_)."
Whatever objections the envoy raised, he refused to accept. They
wrestled and Jānī Beg gave the fall. He was a brave man.

Aḥmad Ḥājī (_Dūldāī Barlās_) was another, a son of Sl. Malik
_Kāshgharī_. Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā gave him the Government of Hīrī (Harāt)
for a time but sent him when his uncle, Jānī Beg died, to Samarkand
with his uncle's appointments. He was pleasant-natured and brave. Wafā'ī
was his pen-name and he put together a dīwān in verse not bad. This
couplet is his:

"I am drunk, Inspector, to-day keep your hand off me,
"Inspect me on the day you catch me sober."

Mīr `Alī-sher Nāwā'ī when he went from Hīrī to Samarkand, was with Aḥmad
Ḥājī Beg but he went back to Hīrī when Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā (Bāī-qarā)
became supreme (873 AH.-1460 AD.) and he there received exceeding
favour.

[Sidenote: Fol. 21b.] Aḥmad Ḥājī Beg kept and rode excellent
_tīpūchāqs_,[214] mostly of his own breeding. Brave he was but his power
to command did not match his courage; he was careless and what was
necessary in his affairs, his retainers and followers put through. He
fell into Sl. `Alī Mīrzā's hands when the Mīrzā defeated Bāī-sunghar
Mīrzā in Bukhārā (901 AH.), and was then put to a dishonourable death on
the charge of the blood of Darwesh Muḥammad Tarkhān.[215]

Darwesh Muḥammad Tarkhān (_Arghūn_) was another, the son of Aūrdū-būghā
Tarkhān and full-brother of the mother of Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā and Sl. Maḥmūd
Mīrzā.[216] Of all begs in Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā's presence, he was the
greatest and most honoured. He was an orthodox Believer, kindly and
darwesh-like, and was a constant transcriber of the Qu'rān.[217] He
played chess often and well, thoroughly understood the science of
fowling and flew his birds admirably. He died in the height of his
greatness, with a bad name, during the troubles between Sl. `Alī Mīrzā
and Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā.[218]

`Abdu'l-`alī Tarkhān was another, a near relation of Darwesh Muḥammad
Tarkhān, possessor also of his younger sister,[219] that is to say, Bāqī
Tarkhān's mother. Though both by the Mughūl rule (_tūrā_) and by his
rank, Darwesh Muḥammad Tarkhān was the superior of `Abdu'l-`alī
Tarkhān, this Pharoah regarded him not at all. For some years he had the
Government of Bukhārā. His retainers were reckoned at [Sidenote: Fol.
22.] 3,000 and he kept them well and handsomely. His gifts
(_bakhshīsh_), his visits of enquiry (_purshīsh_), his public audience
(_dīwān_), his work-shops (_dast-gāh_), his open-table (_shīlān_) and
his assemblies (_majlis_) were all like a king's. He was a strict
disciplinarian, a tyrannical, vicious, self-infatuated person. Shaibānī
Khān, though not his retainer, was with him for a time; most of the
lesser (Shaibān) sulṯāns did themselves take service with him. This same
`Abdu'l-`alī Tarkhān was the cause of Shaibānī Khān's rise to such a
height and of the downfall of such ancient dynasties.[220]

Sayyid Yūsuf, the Grey Wolfer[221] was another; his grandfather will
have come from the Mughūl horde; his father was favoured by Aūlūgh Beg
Mīrzā (_Shāhrukhī_). His judgment and counsel were excellent; he had
courage too. He played well on the guitar (_qūbuz_). He was with me when
I first went to Kābul; I shewed him great favour and in truth he was
worthy of favour. I left him in Kābul the first year the army rode out
for Hindūstān; at that time he went to God's mercy.[222]

Darwesh Beg was another; he was of the line of Aīku-tīmūr Beg,[223] a
favourite of Tīmūr Beg. He was a disciple of his Highness Khwāja
`Ubaidu'l-lāh (_Aḥrārī_), had knowledge of the science of music, played
several instruments and was naturally [Sidenote: Fol. 22b.] disposed to
poetry. He was drowned in the Chīr at the time of Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā's
discomfiture.

Muḥammad Mazīd Tarkhān was another, a younger full-brother of Darwesh
Muḥ. Tarkhān. He was Governor in Turkistān for some years till Shaibānī
Khān took it from him. His judgment and counsel were excellent; he was
an unscrupulous and vicious person. The second and third times I took
Samarkand, he came to my presence and each time I shewed him very great
favour. He died in the fight at Kūl-i-malik (918 AH.-1512 AD.).

Bāqī Tarkhān was another, the son of `Abdu'l-`alī Tarkhān and Sl. Aḥmad
Mīrzā's aunt. When his father died, they gave him Bukhārā. He grew in
greatness under Sl. `Alī Mīrzā, his retainers numbering 5 or 6,000. He
was neither obedient nor very submissive to Sl. `Alī Mīrzā. He fought
Shaibānī Khān at Dabūsī (905 AH.) and was crushed; by the help of this
defeat, Shaibānī Khān went and took Bukhārā. He was very fond of
hawking; they say he kept 700 birds. His manners and habits were not
such as may be told;[224] he grew up with a Mīrzā's state and splendour.
Because his father had shewn favour to Shaibānī Khān, he went to the
Khān's presence, but that inhuman ingrate made him no sort of return in
favour and kindness. [Sidenote: Fol. 23.] He left the world at Akhsī, in
misery and wretchedness.

Sl. Ḥusain _Arghūn_ was another. He was known as Qarā-kūlī because he
had held the Qarā-kūl government for a time. His judgment and counsel
were excellent; he was long in my presence also.

Qulī Muḥammad _Būghdā_[225] was another, a _qūchīn_; he must have been a
brave man.

`Abdu'l-karīm _Ishrit_[226] was another; he was an Aūīghūr, Sl. Aḥmad
Mīrzā's Lord of the Gate, a brave and generous man.

(_u. Historical narrative resumed._)

After Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā's death, his begs in agreement, sent a courier by
the mountain-road to invite Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā.[227]

Malik-i-Muḥammad Mīrzā, the son of Minūchihr Mīrzā, Sl. Abū-sa`īd
Mīrzā's eldest brother, aspired for his own part to rule. Having drawn a
few adventurers and desperadoes to himself, they dribbled away[228] from
(Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā's) camp and went to Samarkand. He was not able to
effect anything, but he brought about his own death and that of several
innocent persons of the ruling House.

At once on hearing of his brother's death, Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā went off to
Samarkand and there seated himself on the throne, without difficulty.
Some of his doings soon disgusted and alienated high and low, soldier
and peasant. The first of these was that he sent the above-named
Malik-i-Muḥammad to the [Sidenote: Fol. 23b.] Kūk-sarāī,[229] although
he was his father's brother's son and his own son-in-law.[230] With him
he sent others, four Mīrzās in all. Two of these he set aside;
Malik-i-Muḥammad and one other he martyred. Some of the four were not
even of ruling rank and had not the smallest aspiration to rule; though
Malik-i-Muḥammad Mīrzā was a little in fault, in the rest there was no
blame whatever. A second thing was that though his methods and
regulations were excellent, and though he was expert in revenue matters
and in the art of administration, his nature inclined to tyranny and
vice. Directly he reached Samarkand, he began to make new regulations
and arrangements and to rate and tax on a new basis. Moreover the
dependants of his (late) Highness Khwāja `Ubaid'l-lāh, under whose
protection formerly many poor and destitute persons had lived free from
the burden of dues and imposts, were now themselves treated with
harshness and oppression. On what ground should hardship have touched
them? Nevertheless oppressive exactions were made from them, indeed from
the Khwāja's very children. Yet another thing was that just as he was
vicious and tyrannical, so were his begs, small and great, and his
retainers and followers. The Ḥiṣārīs and in particular the followers of
Khusrau Shāh engaged themselves unceasingly with wine and fornication.
Once one of them enticed and took away a certain man's wife. [Sidenote:
Fol. 24.]When her husband went to Khusrau Shāh and asked for justice, he
received for answer: "She has been with you for several years; let her
be a few days with him." Another thing was that the young sons of the
townsmen and shopkeepers, nay! even of Turks and soldiers could not go
out from their houses from fear of being taken for catamites. The
Samarakandīs, having passed 20 or 25 years under Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā in ease
and tranquillity, most matters carried through lawfully and with justice
by his Highness the Khwāja, were wounded and troubled in heart and soul,
by this oppression and this vice. Low and high, the poor, the destitute,
all opened the mouth to curse, all lifted the hand for redress.

"Beware the steaming up of inward wounds,
For an inward wound at the last makes head;
Avoid while thou canst, distress to one heart,
For a single sigh will convulse a world."[231]

By reason of his infamous violence and vice Sl. Maḥmud Mīrzā did not
rule in Samarkand more than five or six months.

900 AH.-OCT. 2ND. 1494 TO SEP. 21ST. 1495 AD.[232]

This year Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā sent an envoy, named `Abdu'l-qadūs Beg,[233]
to bring me a gift from the wedding he had made with splendid festivity
for his eldest son, Mas`ūd Mīrzā with (Ṣāliḥa-sulṯān), the Fair Begīm,
the second daughter of his elder brother, Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā. They had sent
gold and silver almonds and pistachios.

There must have been relationship between this envoy and Ḥasan-i-yaq`ūb,
and on its account he will have been the man sent to make
Ḥasan-i-yaq`ūb, by fair promises, look towards Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā.
Ḥasan-i-yaq`ūb returned him a smooth answer, made indeed as though won
over to his side, and gave him leave to go. Five or six months later,
his manners changed entirely; he began to behave ill to those about me
and to others, and he carried matters so far that he would have
dismissed me in order to put Jahāngīr Mīrzā in my place. Moreover his
conversation with the whole body of begs and soldiers was not what
should be; every-one came to know what was in his mind. Khwāja-i-Qāzī
and (Sayyid) Qāsim _Qūchīn_ and `Alī-dost T̤aghāī met other well-wishers
of mine in the presence of my grandmother, Āīsān-daulat Begīm and
decided to give quietus to Ḥasan-i-yaq`ūb's disloyalty by his
deposition.

Few amongst women will have been my grandmother's equals for judgment
and counsel; she was very wise and far-sighted and most affairs of mine
were carried through under her advice. She and my mother were (living)
in the Gate-house of the outer fort;[234] Ḥasan-i-yaq`ūb was in the
citadel.

When I went to the citadel, in pursuance of our decision, he had ridden
out, presumably for hawking, and as soon as he had [Sidenote: Fol. 25.]
our news, went off from where he was towards Samarkand. The begs and
others in sympathy with him,[235] were arrested; one was Muḥammad Bāqir
Beg; Sl. Maḥmud _Dūldāī_, Sl. Muḥammad _Dūldāī's_ father, was another;
there were several more; to some leave was given to go for Samarkand.
The Andijān Government and control of my Gate were settled on (Sayyid)
Qāsim _Qūchīn_.

A few days after Ḥasan-i-yaq`ūb reached Kand-i-badām on the Samarkand
road, he went to near the Khūqān sub-division (_aūrchīn_) with
ill-intent on Akhsī. Hearing of it, we sent several begs and braves to
oppose him; they, as they went, detached a scouting party ahead; he,
hearing this, moved against the detachment, surrounded it in its
night-quarters[236] and poured flights of arrows (_shība_) in on it. In
the darkness of the night an arrow (_aūq_), shot by one of his own men,
hit him just (_aūq_) in the vent (_qāchār_) and before he could take
vent (_qāchār_),[237] he became the captive of his own act.

"If you have done ill, keep not an easy mind,
For retribution is Nature's law."[238]

This year I began to abstain from all doubtful food, my obedience
extended even to the knife, the spoon and the table-cloth;[239] also the
after-midnight Prayer (_taḥajjud_) was [Sidenote: Fol. 25b.] less
neglected.

(_a. Death of Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā._)

In the month of the latter Rabī` (January 1495 AD.), Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā
was confronted by violent illness and in six days, passed from the
world. He was 43 (lunar) years old.

_b. His birth and lineage._

He was born in 857 AH. (1453 AD.), was Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā's third son
and the full-brother of Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā.[240]

_c. His appearance and characteristics._

He was a short, stout, sparse-bearded and somewhat ill-shaped person.
His manners and his qualities were good, his rules and methods of
business excellent; he was well-versed in accounts, not a _dinār_ or a
_dirhām_[241] of revenue was spent without his knowledge. The pay of his
servants was never disallowed. His assemblies, his gifts, his open
table, were all good. Everything of his was orderly and
well-arranged;[242] no soldier or peasant could deviate in the slightest
from any plan of his. Formerly he must have been hard set (_qātīrār_) on
hawking but latterly he very frequently hunted driven game.[243] He
carried violence and vice to frantic excess, was a constant wine-bibber
and kept many catamites. If anywhere in his territory, there was a
handsome boy, he used, by whatever means, to have him brought for a
catamite; of his begs' sons and of his sons' begs' sons he made
catamites; and laid command for this service on [Sidenote: Fol. 26.] his
very foster brothers and on their own brothers. So common in his day was
that vile practice, that no person was without his catamite; to keep one
was thought a merit, not to keep one, a defect. Through his infamous
violence and vice, his sons died in the day of their strength (_tamām
juwān_).

He had a taste for poetry and put a _dīwān_[244] together but his verse
is flat and insipid,—not to compose is better than to compose verse such
as his. He was not firm in the Faith and held his Highness Khwāja
`Ubaidu'l-lāh (_Aḥrārī_) in slight esteem. He had no heart (_yūruk_) and
was somewhat scant in modesty,—several of his impudent buffoons used to
do their filthy and abominable acts in his full Court, in all men's
sight. He spoke badly, there was no understanding him at first.

_d. His battles._

He fought two battles, both with Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā (_Bāīqarā_). The first
was in Astarābād; here he was defeated. The second was at Chīkman
(Sarāī),[245] near Andikhūd; here also he was defeated. He went twice to
Kāfiristān, on the [Sidenote: Fol. 26b.] south of Badakhshān, and made
Holy War; for this reason they wrote him Sl. Maḥmūd _Ghāzī_ in the
headings of his public papers.

_e. His countries._

Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā gave him Astarābād.[246] After the `Irāq disaster
(_i.e._, his father's death,) he went into Khurāsān. At that time,
Qaṃbar-`alī Beg, the governor of Ḥiṣār, by Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā's orders,
had mobilized the Hindūstān[247] army and was following him into `Irāq;
he joined Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā in Khurāsān but the Khurāsānīs, hearing of
Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā's approach, rose suddenly and drove them out of the
country. On this Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā went to his elder brother, Sl. Aḥmad
Mīrzā in Samarkand. A few months later Sayyid Badr and Khusrau Shāh and
some braves under Aḥmad _Mushtāq_[248] took him and fled to Qaṃbar-`alī
in Ḥiṣār. From that time forth, Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā possessed the countries
lying south of Quhqa (Quhlugha) and the Kohtin Range as far as the
Hindū-kush Mountains, such as Tīrmīẕ, Chaghānīān, Ḥiṣār, Khutlān, Qūndūz
and Badakhshān. He also held Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā's lands, after his
brother's death.

_f. His children._

He had five sons and eleven daughters.

Sl. Mas`ūd Mīrzā was his eldest son; his mother was Khān-zāda [Sidenote:
Fol 27.] Begīm, a daughter of the Great Mīr of Tīrmīẕ. Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā
was another; his mother was Pasha (or Pāshā) Begīm. Sl. `Alī Mīrzā was
another; his mother was an Aūzbeg, a concubine called Zuhra Begī Āghā.
Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā was another; his mother was Khān-zāda Begīm, a
grand-daughter of the Great Mīr of Tīrmīẕ; he went to God's mercy in his
father's life-time, at the age of 13. Sl. Wais Mīrzā (Mīrzā Khān) was
another; his mother, Sulṯān-nigār Khānīm was a daughter of Yūnas Khān
and was a younger (half-) sister of my mother. The affairs of these four
Mīrzās will be written of in this history under the years of their
occurrence.

Of Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā's daughters, three were by the same mother as
Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā. One of these, Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā's senior, Sl. Maḥmūd
Mīrzā made to go out to Malik-i-muḥammad Mīrzā, the son of his paternal
uncle, Minūchihr Mīrzā.[249]

* * * * *

Five other daughters were by Khān-zāda Begīm, the grand-daughter of the
Great Mīr of Tīrmīẕ. The oldest of these, (Khān-zāda Begīm)[250] was
given, after her father's death, to Abā-bikr [Sidenote: Fol. 27b.]
(_Dūghlāt_) _Kāshgharī_. The second was Bega Begīm. When Sl. Ḥusain
Mīrzā besieged Ḥiṣār (901 AH.), he took her for Ḥaidar Mīrzā, his son by
Pāyanda Begīm, Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā's daughter, and having done so, rose
from before the place.[251] The third daughter was Āq (Fair) Begīm; the
fourth[252]—,was betrothed to Jahāngīr Mīrzā (_aet._ 5, _circa_ 895 AH.)
at the time his father, `Umar Shaikh Mīrzā sent him to help Sl. Maḥmūd
Mīrzā with the Andijān army, against Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā, then attacking
Qūndūz.[253] In 910 AH. (1504 AD.) when Bāqī _Chaghānīānī_[254] waited
on me on the bank of the Amū (Oxus), these (last-named two) Begīms were
with their mothers in Tīrmīẕ and joined me then with Bāqī's family. When
we reached Kahmard, Jahāngīr Mīrzā took —-- Begīm; one little daughter
was born; she now[255] is in the Badakhshān country with her
grandmother. The fifth daughter was Zainab-sulṯān Begīm; under my
mother's insistence, I took her at the time of the capture of Kābul (910
AH.-Oct. 1504 AD.). She did not become very congenial; two or three
years later, she left the world, through small-pox. Another daughter was
Makhdūm-sulṯān Begīm, Sl. `Alī Mīrzā's full-sister; she is now in the
Badakhshān country. Two others of his daughters, Rajab-sulṯān and
Muḥibb-sulṯān, were by mistresses (_ghūnchachī_).

_g. His ladies_ (_khwātīnlār_) _and concubines_ (_sarārī_).

His chief wife, Khān-zāda Begīm, was a daughter of the [Sidenote: Fol.
28.] Great Mīr of Tirmīẕ; he had great affection for her and must have
mourned her bitterly; she was the mother of Sl. Mas`ūd Mīrzā. Later on,
he took her brother's daughter, also called Khān-zāda Begīm, a
grand-daughter of the Great Mīr of Tīrmīẕ. She became the mother of
five of his daughters and one of his sons. Pasha (or Pāshā) Begīm was
another wife, a daughter of `Alī-shukr Beg, a Turkmān Beg of the Black
Sheep Bahārlū Aīmāq.[256] She had been the wife of Jahān-shāh (_Barānī_)
of the Black Sheep Turkmāns. After Aūzūn (Long) Ḥasan Beg of the White
Sheep had taken Āẕar-bāījān and `Irāq from the sons of this Jahān-shāh
Mīrzā (872 AH.-1467 AD.), `Alī-shukr Beg's sons went with four or five
thousand heads-of-houses of the Black Sheep Turkmāns to serve Sl.
Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā and after the Mīrzā's defeat (873 AH. by Aūzūn Ḥasan),
came down to these countries and took service with Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā.
This happened after Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā came to Ḥiṣār from Samarkand, and
then it was he took Pasha Begīm. She became the mother of one of his
sons and three of his daughters. Sulṯān-nigār Khānīm was another of his
ladies; her descent has been mentioned already in the account of the
(Chaghatāī) Khāns. [Sidenote: Fol. 28b.]

He had many concubines and mistresses. His most honoured concubine
(_mu`atabar ghūma_) was Zuhra Begī Āghā; she was taken in his father's
life-time and became the mother of one son and one daughter. He had many
mistresses and, as has been said, two of his daughters were by two of
them.

_h. His amirs._

Khusrau Shāh was of the Turkistānī Qīpchāqs. He had been in the intimate
service of the Tarkhān begs, indeed had been a catamite. Later on he
became a retainer of Mazīd Beg (Tarkhān) _Arghūn_ who favoured him in
all things. He was favoured by Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā on account of services
done by him when, after the `Irāq disaster, he joined the Mīrzā on his
way to Khurāsān. He waxed very great in his latter days; his retainers,
under Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā, were a clear five or six thousand. Not only
Badakhshān but the whole country from the Amū to the Hindū-kush
Mountains depended on him and he devoured its whole revenue (_darobast
yīr īdī_). His open table was good, so too his open hand; though he was
a rough getter,[257] what he got, he spent liberally. He waxed
exceeding great after Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā's death, in whose sons' time his
retainers approached 20,000. Although he prayed and abstained from
forbidden aliments, yet was he black-souled and vicious, [Sidenote: Fol.
29.] dunder-headed and senseless, disloyal and a traitor to his salt.
For the sake of this fleeting, five-days world,[258] he blinded one of
his benefactor's sons and murdered another. A sinner before God,
reprobate to His creatures, he has earned curse and execration till the
very verge of Resurrection. For this world's sake he did his evil deeds
and yet, with lands so broad and with such hosts of armed retainers, he
had not pluck to stand up to a hen. An account of him will come into
this history.

Pīr-i-muḥammad _Aīlchī-būghā[259] Qūchīn_ was another. In Hazārāspī's
fight[260] he got in one challenge with his fists in Sl. Abū-sa`īd
Mīrzā's presence at the Gate of Balkh. He was a brave man, continuously
serving the Mīrzā (Maḥmūd) and guiding him by his counsel. Out of
rivalry to Khusrau Shāh, he made a night-attack when the Mīrzā was
besieging Qūndūz, on Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā, with few men, without arming[261]
and without plan; he could do nothing; what was there he could do
against such and so large a force? He was pursued, threw himself into
the river and was drowned.

Ayūb (_Begchīk Mughūl_)[262] was another. He had served in Sl. Abū-sa`īd
Mīrzā's Khurāsān Cadet Corps, a brave man, Bāīsunghar Mīrzā's guardian.
He was choice in dress and food; a jester and talkative, nicknamed
Impudence, perhaps because the Mīrzā called him so. [Sidenote: Fol.
29b.]

Walī was another, the younger, full-brother of Khusrau Shāh. He kept his
retainers well. He it was brought about the blinding of Sl. Mas`ūd Mīrzā
and the murder of Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā. He had an ill-word for every-one
and was an evil-tongued, foul-mouthed, self-pleasing and dull-witted
mannikin. He approved of no-one but himself. When I went from the Qūndūz
country to near Dūshī (910 AH.-1503 AD.), separated Khusrau Shāh from
his following and dismissed him, this person (_i.e._, Walī) had come to
Andar-āb and Sīr-āb, also in fear of the Aūzbegs. The Aīmāqs of those
parts beat and robbed him[263] then, having let me know, came on to
Kābul. Walī went to Shaibānī Khān who had his head struck off in the
town of Samarkand.

Shaikh `Abdu'l-lāh _Barlās_[264] was another; he had to wife one of the
daughters of Shāh Sulṯān Muḥammad (_Badakhshī_) _i.e._, the maternal
aunt of Abā-bikr Mīrzā (_Mīrān-shāhī_) and of Sl. Maḥmūd Khān. He wore
his tunic narrow and _pur shaqq_[265]; he was a kindly well-bred man.

Maḥmūd _Barlās_ of the Barlāses of Nūndāk (Badakhshān) was another. He
had been a beg also of Sl. Abū-sa`īd Mīrzā and had surrendered Karmān to
him when the Mīrzā took the `Irāq countries. When Abā-bikr Mīrzā
(_Mīrān-shāhī_) came [Sidenote: Fol. 30.] against Ḥiṣār with Mazīd Beg
Tarkhān and the Black Sheep Turkmāns, and Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā went off to
his elder brother, Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā in Samarkand, Maḥmūd _Barlās_ did not
surrender Ḥiṣār but held out manfully.[266] He was a poet and put a
_dīwān_ together.

(_i. Historical narrative resumed_).

When Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā died, Khusrau Shāh kept the event concealed and
laid a long hand on the treasure. But how could such news be hidden? It
spread through the town at once. That was a festive day for the
Samarkand families; soldier and peasant, they uprose in tumult against
Khusrau Shāh. Aḥmad Ḥājī Beg and the Tarkhānī begs put the rising down
and turned Khusrau Shāh out of the town with an escort for Ḥiṣār.

As Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā himself after giving Ḥiṣār to Sl. Mas`ūd Mīrzā and
Bukhārā to Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā, had dismissed both to their governments,
neither was present when he died. The Ḥiṣār and Samarkand begs, after
turning Khusrau Shāh out, agreed to send for Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā from
Bukhārā, brought him to Samarkand and seated him on the throne. When he
thus became supreme (_pādshāh_), he was 18 (lunar) years old.

At this crisis, Sl. Maḥmūd Khān (_Chaghatāī_), acting on the [Sidenote:
Fol. 30b.] word of Junaid _Barlās_ and of some of the notables of
Samarkand, led his army out to near Kān-bāī with desire to take that
town. Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā, on his side, marched out in force. They fought
near Kān-bāī. Ḥaidar _Kūkūldāsh_, the main pillar of the Mughūl army,
led the Mughūl van. He and all his men dismounted and were pouring in
flights of arrows (_shība_) when a large body of the mailed braves of
Ḥiṣār and Samarkand made an impetuous charge and straightway laid them
under their horses' feet. Their leader taken, the Mughūl army was put to
rout without more fighting. Masses (_qālīn_) of Mughūls were wiped out;
so many were beheaded in Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā's presence that his tent was
three times shifted because of the number of the dead.

At this same crisis, Ibrāhīm _Sārū_ entered the fort of Asfara, there
read Bāī-sunghar Mīrzā's name in the _Khuṯba_ and took up a position of
hostility to me.

(_Author's note._) Ibrāhīm _Sārū_ is of the Mīnglīgh
people;[267] he had served my father in various ways from his
childhood but later on had been dismissed for some fault.

[Sidenote: Fol. 31.] The army rode out to crush this rebellion in the
month of Sha'bān (May) and by the end of it, had dismounted round
Asfara. Our braves in the wantonness of enterprise, on the very day of
arrival, took the new wall[268] that was in building outside the fort.
That day Sayyid Qāsim, Lord of my Gate, out-stripped the rest and got in
with his sword; Sl. Aḥmad _Taṃbal_ and Muḥammad-dost T̤aghāī got theirs
in also but Sayyid Qāsim won the Champion's Portion. He took it in
Shāhrukhiya when I went to see my mother's brother, Sl. Maḥmūd Khān.

(_Author's note._) The Championship Portion[269] is an ancient
usage of the Mughūl horde. Whoever outdistanced his tribe and
got in with his own sword, took the portion at every feast and
entertainment.

My guardian, Khudāī-bīrdī Beg died in that first day's fighting, struck
by a cross-bow arrow. As the assault was made without armour, several
bare braves (_yīkīt yīlāng_)[270] perished and many were wounded. One of
Ibrāhīm _Sārū's_ cross-bowmen was an excellent shot; his equal had never
been seen; he it was hit most of those wounded. When Asfara had been
taken, he entered my service.

As the siege drew on, orders were given to construct head-strikes[271]
in two or three places, to run mines and to make every [Sidenote: Fol.
31b.] effort to prepare appliances for taking the fort. The siege lasted
40 days; at last Ibrāhīm _Sārū_ had no resource but, through the
mediation of Khwāja Moulānā-i-qāẓī, to elect to serve me. In the month
of

Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/44608