This year saw the end of the duel for possession of Qandahār.
Khwānd-amīr's account of its surrender differs widely from Ma`ṣūm's. It
claims that Bābur's retirement in 927 AH. was due to the remonstrances
from Harāt, and that Shāh Beg, worn out by the siege, relied on the
arrangement the Amīrs had made with Bābur and went to Sīwī, leaving one
`Abdu'l-bāqī in charge of the place. This man, says Khwānd-amīr, drew
the line of obliteration over his duty to his master, sent to Bābur,
brought him down to Qandahār, and gave him the keys of the town—by the
hand of Khwānd-amīr's nephew Ghiyāṣu'd-dīn, specifies the
_Tarkhān-nāma_. In this year messengers had come and gone between Bābur
and Harāt; two men employed by Amīr Khān are mentioned by name; of them
the last had not returned to Harāt when a courier of Bābur's, bringing a
tributary gift, announced there that the town was in his master's hands.
Khwānd-amīr thus fixes the year 928 AH. as that in which the town passed
into Bābur's hands; this date is confirmed by the one inscribed in the
monument of victory at Chihil-zīna which Bābur ordered excavated on the
naze of the limestone ridge behind the town. The date there given is
Shawwāl 13th 928 AH. (Sep. 6th 1522 AD.).
Ma`ṣūm's account, dated 923 AH. (1517 AD.), is of the briefest:—Shāh Beg
fulfilled his promise, much to Bābur's approval, by sending him the keys
of the town and royal residence.
Although Khwānd-amīr's account has good claim to be accepted, it must be
admitted that several circumstances can be taken to show that Shāh Beg
had abandoned Qandahār, _e.g._ the removal of the families after Bābur's
retirement last year, and his own absence in a remote part of Sind this
year.
_c. The year of Shāh Beg's death._
Of several variant years assigned for the death of Shāh Beg in the
sources, two only need consideration.[1555] There is consensus of
opinion about the month and close agreement about the day, Sha`bān 22nd
or 23rd. Ma`ṣūm gives a chronogram, _Shahr-Sha`bān_, (month of Sha`bān)
which yields 928, but he does not mention where he obtained it, nor does
anything in his narrative shew what has fixed the day of the month.
Two objections to 928 are patent: (1) the doubt engendered by Ma`ṣūm's
earlier ante-dating; (2) that if 928 be right, Shāh Beg was already dead
over two months when Qandahār was surrendered. This he might have been
according to Khwānd-amīr's narrative, but if he died on Sha`bān 22nd 928
(July 26th 1522), there was time for the news to have reached Qandahār,
and to have gone on to Harāt before the surrender. Shāh Beg's death at
that time could not have failed to be associated in Khwānd-amīr's
narrative with the fate of Qandahār; it might have pleaded some excuse
with him for `Abdu'l-bāqī, who might even have had orders from Shāh
Ḥasan to make the town over to Bābur whose suzerainty he had
acknowledged at once on succession by reading the _khuṯba_ in his name.
Khwānd-amīr however does not mention what would have been a salient
point in the events of the siege; his silence cannot but weigh against
the 928 AH.
The year 930 AH. is given by Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥmad's _T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī_
(lith. ed. p. 637), and this year has been adopted by Erskine, Beale,
and Ney Elias, perhaps by others. Some light on the matter may be
obtained incidentally as the sources are examined for a complete history
of India, perhaps coming from the affairs of Multān, which was attacked
by Shāh Ḥasan after communication with Bābur.
_d. Bābur's literary work in 928 AH. and earlier._
1. The _Mubīn_. This year, as is known from a chronogram within the
work, Bābur wrote the Turkī poem of 2000 lines to which Abū'l-faẓl and
Badāyūnī give the name _Mubīn_ (The Exposition), but of which the true
title is said by the _Nafā'isu'l-ma`āsir_ to be _Dar fiqa mubaiyan_ (The
Law expounded). Sprenger found it called also _Fiqa-i-bāburī_ (Bābur's
Law). It is a versified and highly orthodox treatise on Muḥammadan Law,
written for the instruction of Kāmrān. A Commentary on it, called also
_Mubīn_, was written by Shaikh Zain. Bābur quotes from it (f. 351_b_)
when writing of linear measures. Berézine found and published a large
portion of it as part of his _Chrestomathie Turque_ (Kazan 1857); the
same fragment may be what was published by Ilminsky. Teufel remarks that
the MS. used by Berézine may have descended direct from one sent by
Bābur to a distinguished legist of Transoxiana, because the last words
of Berézine's imprint are Bābur's _Begleitschreiben_ (_envoi_); he adds
the expectation that the legist's name might be learned. Perhaps this
recipient was the Khwāja Kalān, son of Khwāja Yaḥya, a Samarkandī to
whom Bābur sent a copy of his Memoirs on March 7th 1520 (935 AH. f.
363).[1556]
2. The _Bābur-nāma_ diary of 925-6 AH. (1519-20 AD.). This is almost
contemporary with the _Mubīn_ and is the earliest part of the
_Bābur-nāma_ writings now known. It was written about a decade earlier
than the narrative of 899 to 914 AH. (1494 to 1507 AD.), carries later
annotations, and has now the character of a draft awaiting revision.
3. A _Dīwān_ (Collection of poems). By dovetailing a few fragments of
information, it becomes clear that by 925 AH. (1519 AD.) Bābur had made
a Collection of poetical compositions distinct from the Rāmpūr _Dīwān_;
it is what he sent to Pūlād Sulṯan in 925 AH. (f. 238). Its date
excludes the greater part of the Rāmpūr one. It may have contained those
verses to which my husband drew attention in the Asiatic Quarterly
Review of 1911, as quoted in the _Abūshqa_; and it may have contained,
in agreement with its earlier date, the verses Bābur quotes as written
in his earlier years. None of the quatrains found in the _Abūshqa_ and
there attributed to "Bābur Mīrzā", are in the Rāmpūr _Dīwān_; nor are
several of those early ones of the _Bābur-nāma_. So that the Dīwān sent
to Pūlād Sulṯān may be the source from which the _Abūshqa_ drew its
examples.
On first examining these verses, doubt arose as to whether they were
really by Bābur _Mīrānshāhī_; or whether they were by "Bābur Mīrzā"
_Shāhrukhī_. Fortunately my husband lighted on one of them quoted in the
_Sanglakh_ and there attributed to Bābur Pādshāh. The _Abūshqa_
quatrains are used as examples in de Courteille's _Dictionary_, but
without an author's name; they can be traced there through my husband's
articles.[1557]
929 AH.—NOV. 20TH 1522 TO NOV. 10TH 1523 AD.
_a. Affairs of Hindūstān._
The centre of interest in Bābur's affairs now moves from Qandahār to a
Hindūstān torn by faction, of which faction one result was an appeal
made at this time to Bābur by Daulat Khān _Lūdī_ (_Yūsuf-khail_) and
`Alāu'd-dīn `Ālam Khān _Lūdī_ for help against Ibrāhīm.[1558]
The following details are taken mostly from Aḥmad Yādgār's
_Tārīkh-i-salāṯīn-i-afāghana_[1559]:—Daulat Khān had been summoned to
Ibrāhīm's presence; he had been afraid to go and had sent his son
Dilāwar in his place; his disobedience angering Ibrāhīm, Dilāwar had a
bad reception and was shewn a ghastly exhibit of disobedient commanders.
Fearing a like fate for himself, he made escape and hastened to report
matters to his father in Lāhor. His information strengthening Daulat
Khān's previous apprehensions, decided the latter to proffer allegiance
to Bābur and to ask his help against Ibrāhīm. Apparently `Ālam Khān's
interests were a part of this request. Accordingly Dilāwar (or Apāq)
Khān went to Kābul, charged with his father's message, and with intent
to make known to Bābur Ibrāhīm's evil disposition, his cruelty and
tyranny, with their fruit of discontent amongst his Commanders and
soldiery.
_b. Reception of Dilāwar Khān in Kābul._
Wedding festivities were in progress[1560] when Dilāwar Khān reached
Kābul. He presented himself, at the Chār-bāgh may be inferred, and had
word taken to Bābur that an Afghān was at his Gate with a petition. When
admitted, he demeaned himself as a suppliant and proceeded to set forth
the distress of Hindūstān. Bābur asked why he, whose family had so long
eaten the salt of the Lūdīs, had so suddenly deserted them for himself.
Dilāwar answered that his family through 40 years had upheld the Lūdī
throne, but that Ibrāhīm maltreated Sikandar's amīrs, had killed 25 of
them without cause, some by hanging some burned alive, and that there
was no hope of safety in him. Therefore, he said, he had been sent by
many amīrs to Bābur whom they were ready to obey and for whose coming
they were on the anxious watch.
_c. Bābur asks a sign._
At the dawn of the day following the feast, Bābur prayed in the garden
for a sign of victory in Hindūstān, asking that it should be a gift to
himself of mango or betel, fruits of that land. It so happened that
Daulat Khān had sent him, as a present, half-ripened mangoes preserved
in honey; when these were set before him, he accepted them as the sign,
and from that time forth, says the chronicler, made preparation for a
move on Hindūstān.
_d. `Ālam Khān._
Although `Ālam Khān seems to have had some amount of support for his
attempt against his nephew, events show he had none valid for his
purpose. That he had not Daulat Khān's, later occurrences make clear.
Moreover he seems not to have been a man to win adherence or to be
accepted as a trustworthy and sensible leader.[1561] Dates are uncertain
in the absence of Bābur's narrative, but it may have been in this year
that `Ālam Khān went in person to Kābul and there was promised help
against Ibrāhīm.
_e. Birth of Gul-badan._
Either in this year or the next was born Dil-dār's third daughter
Gul-badan, the later author of an _Humāyūn-nāma_ written at her nephew
Akbar's command in order to provide information for the _Akbar-nāma_.
930 AH.—NOV. 10TH 1523 TO OCT. 29TH 1524 AD.
_a. Bābur's fourth expedition to Hindūstān._
This expedition differs from all earlier ones by its co-operation with
Afghān malcontents against Ibrāhīm _Lūdī_, and by having for its
declared purpose direct attack on him through reinforcement of `Ālam
Khān.
Exactly when the start from Kābul was made is not found stated; the
route taken after fording the Indus, was by the sub-montane road through
the Kakar country; the Jīhlam and Chīn-āb were crossed and a move was
made to within 10 miles of Lāhor.
Lāhor was Daulat Khān's head-quarters but he was not in it now; he had
fled for refuge to a colony of Bilūchīs, perhaps towards Multān, on the
approach against him of an army of Ibrāhīm's under Bihār Khān _Lūdī_. A
battle ensued between Bābur and Bihār Khān; the latter was defeated with
great slaughter; Bābur's troops followed his fugitive men into Lāhor,
plundered the town and burned some of the _bāzārs_.
Four days were spent near Lāhor, then move south was made to Dībālpūr
which was stormed, plundered and put to the sword. The date of this
capture is known from an incidental remark of Bābur about chronograms
(f. 325), to be mid-Rabī`u'l-awwal 930 AH. (_circa_ Jan. 22nd 1524
AD.).[1562] From Dībālpūr a start was made for Sihrind but before this
could be reached news arrived which dictated return to Lāhor.
_b. The cause of return._
Daulat Khān's action is the obvious cause of the retirement. He and his
sons had not joined Bābur until the latter was at Dībālpūr; he was not
restored to his former place in charge of the important Lāhor, but was
given Jalandhar and Sulṯānpūr, a town of his own foundation. This
angered him extremely but he seems to have concealed his feelings for
the time and to have given Bābur counsel as if he were content. His son
Dilāwar, however, represented to Bābur that his father's advice was
treacherous; it concerned a move to Multān, from which place Daulat Khān
may have come up to Dībālpūr and connected with which at this time,
something is recorded of co-operation by Bābur and Shāh Ḥasan _Arghūn_.
But the incident is not yet found clearly described by a source. Dilāwar
Khān told Bābur that his father's object was to divide and thus weaken
the invading force, and as this would have been the result of taking
Daulat Khān's advice, Bābur arrested him and Apāq on suspicion of
treacherous intent. They were soon released, and Sulṯānpūr was given
them, but they fled to the hills, there to await a chance to swoop on
the Panj-āb. Daulat Khān's hostility and his non-fulfilment of his
engagement with Bābur placing danger in the rear of an eastward advance,
the Panj-āb was garrisoned by Bābur's own followers and he himself went
back to Kābul.
It is evident from what followed that Daulat Khān commanded much
strength in the Panj-āb; evident also that something counselled delay in
the attack on Ibrāhīm, perhaps closer cohesion in favour of `Ālam Khān,
certainly removal of the menace of Daulat Khān in the rear; there may
have been news already of the approach of the Aūzbegs on Balkh which
took Bābur next year across Hindū-kush.
_c. The Panj-āb garrison._
The expedition had extended Bābur's command considerably, notably by
obtaining possession of Lāhor. He now posted in it Mīr `Abdu'l-`azīz his
Master of the Horse; in Dībālpūr he posted, with `Ālam Khān, Bābā Qashqa
_Mughūl_; in Sīālkot, Khusrau Kūkūldāsh, in Kalanūr, Muḥammad `Alī
_Tājik_.
_d. Two deaths._
This year, on Rajab 19th (May 23rd) died Ismā`īl _Ṣafawī_ at the age of
38, broken by defeat from Sulṯān Salīm of Rūm.[1563] He was succeeded by
his son T̤ahmāsp, a child of ten.
This year may be that of the death of Shāh Shujā` _Arghūn_,[1564] on
Sha`bān 22nd (July 18th), the last grief of his burden being the death
of his foster-brother Fāẓil concerning which, as well as Shāh Beg's own
death, Mīr Ma`ṣūm's account is worthy of full reproduction. Shāh Beg was
succeeded in Sind by his son Ḥasan, who read the _khuṯba_ for Bābur and
drew closer links with Bābur's circle by marrying, either this year or
the next, Khalīfa's daughter Gul-barg, with whom betrothal had been made
during Ḥasan's visit to Bābur in Kābul. Moreover Khalīfa's son
Muḥibb-i-`alī married Nāhīd the daughter of Qāsim Kūkūldāsh and
Māh-chūchūk _Arghūn_ (f. 214_b_). These alliances were made, says
Ma`ṣūm, to strengthen Ḥasan's position at Bābur's Court.
_e. A garden detail._
In this year and presumably on his return from the Panj-āb, Bābur, as he
himself chronicles (f. 132), had plantains (bananas) brought from
Hindūstān for the Bāgh-i-wafā at Adīnapūr.
931 AH.—OCT. 29TH 1524 TO OCT. 18TH 1525 AD.
_a. Daulat Khān._
Daulat Khān's power in the Panj-āb is shewn by what he effected after
dispossessed of Lāhor. On Bābur's return to Kābul, he came down from the
hills with a small body of his immediate followers, seized his son
Dilāwar, took Sulṯānpūr, gathered a large force and defeated `Ālam Khān
in Dībālpūr. He detached 5000 men against Sīālkot but Bābur's begs of
Lāhor attacked and overcame them. Ibrāhīm sent an army to reconquer the
Panj-āb; Daulat Khān, profiting by its dissensions and discontents, won
over a part to himself and saw the rest break up.
_b. `Ālam Khān._
From his reverse at Dībālpūr, `Ālam Khān fled straight to Kābul. The
further help he asked was promised under the condition that while he
should take Ibrāhīm's place on the throne of Dihlī, Bābur in full
suzerainty should hold Lāhor and all to the west of it. This arranged,
`Ālam Khān was furnished with a body of troops, given a royal letter to
the Lāhor begs ordering them to assist him, and started off, Bābur
promising to follow swiftly.
`Ālam Khān's subsequent proceedings are told by Bābur in the annals of
932 AH. (1525 AD.) at the time he received details about them (f.
255_b_).
_c. Bābur called to Balkh._
All we have yet found about this affair is what Bābur says in
explanation of his failure to follow `Ālam Khān as promised (f. 256),
namely, that he had to go to Balkh because all the Aūzbeg Sulṯāns and
Khāns had laid siege to it. Light on the affair may come from some
Persian or Aūzbeg chronicle; Bābur's arrival raised the siege; and risk
must have been removed, for Bābur returned to Kābul in time to set out
for his fifth and last expedition to Hindūstān on the first day of the
second month of next year (932 AH. 1525). A considerable body of troops
was in Badakhshān with Humāyūn; their non-arrival next year delaying his
father's progress, brought blame on himself.
[Illustration: Babur's Grave.
_To face p. 445._]
THE MEMOIRS OF BĀBUR
SECTION III. HINDŪSTĀN
932 AH.-OCT. 18TH 1525 TO OCT. 8TH 1526 AD.[1565]
(_a. Fifth expedition into Hindūstān._)
(_Nov. 17th_) On Friday the 1st of the month of Ṣafar at the [Sidenote:
Ḥaidarābād MS. Fol. 251b.] date 932, the Sun being in the Sign of the
Archer, we set out for Hindūstān, crossed the small rise of Yak-langa,
and dismounted in the meadow to the west of the water of
Dih-i-ya`qūb.[1566] `Abdu'l-malūk the armourer came into this camp; he
had gone seven or eight months earlier as my envoy to Sulṯān Sa`īd Khān
(in Kāshghar), and now brought one of the Khān's men, styled Yāngī Beg
(new beg) Kūkūldāsh who conveyed letters, and small presents, and
verbal messages[1567] from the Khānīms and the Khān.[1568]
(_Nov. 18th to 21st_) After staying two days in that camp for the
convenience of the army,[1569] we marched on, halted one night,[1570]
and next dismounted at Bādām-chashma. There we ate a confection
(_ma`jūn_).
(_Nov. 22nd_) On Wednesday (Ṣafar 6th), when we had dismounted at
Bārīk-āb, the younger brethren of Nūr Beg—he himself remaining in
Hindūstān—brought gold _ashrafīs_ and _tankas_[1571] to the value of
20,000 _shāhrukhīs_, sent from the Lāhor revenues by Khwāja Ḥusain. The
greater part of these moneys was despatched by Mullā Aḥmad, one of the
chief men of Balkh, for the benefit of Balkh.[1572]
(_Nov. 24th_) On Friday the 8th of the month (Ṣafar), after [Sidenote:
Fol. 252.] dismounting at Gandamak, I had a violent discharge;[1573] by
God's mercy, it passed off easily.
(_Nov. 25th_) On Saturday we dismounted in the Bāgh-i-wafā. We delayed
there a few days, waiting for Humāyūn and the army from that side.[1574]
More than once in this history the bounds and extent, charm and delight
of that garden have been described; it is most beautifully placed; who
sees it with the buyer's eye will know the sort of place it is. During
the short time we were there, most people drank on drinking-days[1575]
and took their morning; on non-drinking days there were parties for
_ma`jūn_.
I wrote harsh letters to Humāyūn, lecturing him severely because of his
long delay beyond the time fixed for him to join me.[1576]
(_Dec. 3rd_) On Sunday the 17th of Ṣafar, after the morning had been
taken, Humāyūn arrived. I spoke very severely to him at once. Khwāja
Kalān also arrived to-day, coming up from Ghaznī. We marched in the
evening of that same Sunday, and dismounted in a new garden between
Sulṯānpur and Khwāja Rustam.
(_Dec. 6th_) Marching on Wednesday (Ṣafar 20th), we got on a raft, and,
drinking as we went reached Qūsh-guṃbaz,[1577] there landed and joined
the camp.
(_Dec. 7th_) Starting off the camp at dawn, we ourselves went on a raft,
and there ate confection (_ma`jūn_). Our encamping-ground was always
Qīrīq-ārīq, but not a sign or trace of the camp could [Sidenote: Fol.
252b.] be seen when we got opposite it, nor any appearance of our
horses. Thought I, "Garm-chashma (Hot-spring) is close by; they may have
dismounted there." So saying, we went on from Qīrīq-ārīq. By the time we
reached Garm-chashma, the very day was late;[1578] we did not stop
there, but going on in its lateness (_kīchīsī_), had the raft tied up
somewhere, and slept awhile.
(_Dec. 8th_) At day-break we landed at Yada-bīr where, as the day wore
on, the army-folks began to come in. The camp must have been at
Qīrīq-ārīq, but out of our sight.
There were several verse-makers on the raft, such as Shaikh
Abū'l-wajd,[1579] Shaikh Zain, Mullā `Alī-jān, Tardī Beg _Khāksār_ and
others. In this company was quoted the following couplet of Muḥammad
Ṣāliḥ:—[1580]
(Persian) With thee, arch coquette, for a sweetheart, what can man do?
With another than thou where thou art, what can man do?
Said I, "Compose on these lines";[1581] whereupon those given to
versifying, did so. As jokes were always being made at the expense of
Mullā `Alī-jān, this couplet came off-hand into my head:—
(Persian) With one all bewildered as thou, what can man do?
. . . . . . , what can man do?[1582]
(_b. Mention of the Mubīn._[1583])
From time to time before it,[1584] whatever came into my head, of good
or bad, grave or jest, used to be strung into verse and written down,
however empty and harsh the verse might be, but while I was composing
the _Mubīn_, this thought pierced through my dull wits and made way into
my troubled heart, "A pity it [Sidenote: Fol. 253.] will be if the
tongue which has treasure of utterances so lofty as these are, waste
itself again on low words; sad will it be if again vile imaginings find
way into the mind that has made exposition of these sublime
realities."[1585] Since that time I had refrained from satirical and
jesting verse; I was repentant (_ta'īb_); but these matters were totally
out of mind and remembrance when I made that couplet (on Mullā
`Alī-jān).[1586] A few days later in Bīgrām when I had fever and
discharge, followed by cough, and I began to spit blood each time I
coughed, I knew whence my reproof came; I knew what act of mine had
brought this affliction on me.
"Whoever shall violate his oath, will violate it to the hurt of his own
soul; but whoever shall perform that which he hath covenanted with God,
to that man surely will He give great reward" (_Qorān_ cap. 48 v. 10).
(_Turkī_) What is it I do with thee, ah! my tongue?
My entrails bleed as a reckoning for thee.
Good once[1587] as thy words were, has followed
this verse
Jesting, empty,[1588] obscene, has followed a lie.
If thou say, "Burn will I not!" by keeping this vow
Thou turnest thy rein from this field of strife.[1589]
"O Lord! we have dealt unjustly with our own souls; if Thou forgive us
not, and be not merciful unto us, we shall surely be of those that
perish"[1590] (_Qorān_ cap. 7 v. 22).
Taking anew the place of the penitent pleading for pardon, I gave my
mind rest[1591] from such empty thinking and such unlawful occupation. I
broke my pen. Made by that Court, such reproof of sinful slaves is for
their felicity; happy are the highest and the slave when such reproof
brings warning and its profitable fruit.
(_c. Narrative resumed._)
(_Dec. 8th continued_) Marching on that evening, we dismounted at
`Alī-masjid. The ground here being very confined, I always [Sidenote:
Fol. 253b.] used to dismount on a rise overlooking the camp in the
valley-bottom.[1592] The camp-fires made a wonderful illumination there
at night; assuredly it was because of this that there had always been
drinking there, and was so now.
(_Dec. 9th and 10th_) To-day I rode out before dawn; I preferred a
confection (_ma`jūn_)[1593] and also kept this day a fast. We dismounted
near Bīgrām (Peshāwar); and next morning, the camp remaining on that
same ground, rode to Karg-awī.[1594] We crossed the Siyāh-āb in front of
Bīgrām, and formed our hunting-circle looking down-stream. After a
little, a person brought word that there was a rhino in a bit of jungle
near Bīgrām, and that people had been stationed near-about it. We betook
ourselves, loose rein, to the place, formed a ring round the jungle,
made a noise, and brought the rhino out, when it took its way across the
plain. Humāyūn and those come with him from that side (Tramontana), who
had never seen one before, were much entertained. It was pursued for two
miles; many arrows were shot at it; it was brought down without having
made a good set at man or horse. Two others were killed. I had often
wondered how a rhino and an elephant would behave if brought face to
face; this time one came out right in front of some elephants the
mahauts were bringing along; it did not face them [Sidenote: Fol. 254.]
when the mahauts drove them towards it, but got off in another
direction.
(_d. Preparations for ferrying the Indus._[1595])
On the day we were in Bīgrām, several of the begs and household were
appointed, with pay-masters and dīwāns, six or seven being put in
command, to take charge of the boats at the Nīl-āb crossing, to make a
list of all who were with the army, name by name, and to count them up.
That evening I had fever and discharge[1596] which led on to cough and
every time I coughed, I spat blood. Anxiety was great but, by God's
mercy, it passed off in two or three days.
(_Dec. 11th_) It rained when we left Bīgrām; we dismounted on the
Kābul-water.
(_e. News from Lāhor._)
News came that Daulat Khān[1597] and (Apāq) Ghāzī Khān, having collected
an army of from 20 to 30,000, had taken Kilānūr, and intended to move on
Lāhor. At once Mumin-i-`alī the commissary was sent galloping off to
say, "We are advancing march by march;[1598] do not fight till we
arrive."
(_Dec. 14th_) With two night-halts on the way, we reached the water of
Sind (Indus), and there dismounted on Thursday the 28th (of Ṣafar).
(_f. Ferrying the Indus._)
(_Dec. 16th_) On Saturday the 1st of the first Rabī`, we crossed the
Sind-water, crossed the water of Kacha-kot (Hārū), and dismounted on the
bank of the river.[1599] The begs, pay-masters and dīwāns who had been
put in charge of the boats, reported that the number of those come with
the army, great and small, good and bad, retainer and non-retainer, was
written down as 12,000.
(_g. The eastward march._)
The rainfall had been somewhat scant in the plains, but [Sidenote: Fol.
254b.] seemed to have been good in the cultivated lands along the
hill-skirts; for these reasons we took the road for Sīālkot along the
skirt-hills. Opposite Hātī _Kakar's_ country[1600] we came upon a
torrent[1601] the waters of which were standing in pools. Those pools
were all frozen over. The ice was not very thick, as thick as the hand
may-be. Such ice is unusual in Hindūstān; not a sign or trace of any was
seen in the years we were (_aīdūk_) in the country.[1602]
We had made five marches from the Sind-water; after the sixth (_Dec.
22nd_—Rabī` I. 7th) we dismounted on a torrent in the camping-ground
(_yūrt_) of the Bugīāls[1603] below Balnāth Jogī's hill which connects
with the Hill of Jūd.
(_Dec. 23rd_) In order to let people get provisions, we stayed the next
day in that camp. _`Araq_ was drunk on that day. Mullā Muḥ. _Pargharī_
told many stories; never had he been so talkative. Mullā Shams himself
was very riotous; once he began, he did not finish till night.
The slaves and servants, good and bad, who had gone out after
provisions, went further than this[1604] and heedlessly scattered over
jungle and plain, hill and broken ground. Owing to this, a few were
overcome; Kīchkīna _tūnqiṯār_ died there.
(_Dec. 24th_) Marching on, we crossed the Bihat-water at a ford below
Jīlam (Jīhlam) and there dismounted. Walī _Qīzīl_ (Rufus) came there to
see me. He was the Sīālkot reserve, and held the parganas of Bīmrūkī and
Akrīāda. Thinking about Sīālkot, [Sidenote: Fol. 255.] I took towards
him the position of censure and reproach. He excused himself, saying "I
had come to my _pargana_ before Khusrau Kūkūldāsh left Sīālkot; he did
not even send me word." After listening to his excuse, I said, "Since
thou hast paid no attention to Sīālkot, why didst thou not join the begs
in Lāhor?" He was convicted, but as work was at hand, I did not trouble
about his fault.
(_h. Scouts sent with orders to Lāhor._)
(_Dec. 25th_) Sayyid T̤ūfān and Sayyid Lāchīn were sent galloping off,
each with a pair-horse,[1605] to say in Lāhor, "Do not join battle; meet
us at Sīālkot or Parsrūr" (mod. Pasrūr). It was in everyone's mouth that
Ghāzī Khān had collected 30 to 40,000 men, that Daulat Khān, old as he
was, had girt two swords to his waist, and that they were resolved to
fight. Thought I, "The proverb says that ten friends are better than
nine; do you not make a mistake: when the Lāhor begs have joined you,
fight there and then!"
(_Dec. 26th and 27th_) After starting off the two men to the begs, we
moved forward, halted one night, and next dismounted on the bank of the
Chīn-āb (Chan-āb).
As Buhlūlpūr was _khalṣa_,[1606] we left the road to visit it. Its fort
is situated above a deep ravine, on the bank of the Chīn-āb. It pleased
us much. We thought of bringing Sīālkot to it. Please God! the chance
coming, it shall be done straightway! [Sidenote: Fol. 255b.] From
Buhlūlpūr we went to camp by boat.
(_i. Jats and Gujūrs._[1607])
(_Dec. 29th_) On Friday the 14th of the first Rabī` we dismounted at
Sīālkot. If one go into Hindūstān the Jats and Gujūrs always pour down
in countless hordes from hill and plain for loot in bullock and buffalo.
These ill-omened peoples are just senseless oppressors! Formerly their
doings did not concern us much because the country was an enemy's, but
they began the same senseless work after we had taken it. When we
reached Sīālkot, they fell in tumult on poor and needy folks who were
coming out of the town to our camp, and stripped them bare. I had the
silly thieves sought for, and ordered two or three of them cut to
pieces.
From Sīālkot Nūr Beg's brother Shāham also was made to gallop off to the
begs in Lāhor to say, "Make sure where the enemy is; find out from some
well-informed person where he may be met, and send us word."
A trader, coming into this camp, represented that `Ālam Khān had let Sl.
Ibrāhīm defeat him.
(_j. `Ālam Khān's action and failure._[1608])
Here are the particulars:—`Ālam Khān, after taking leave of me (in
Kābul, 931 AH.), went off in that heat by double marches, regardless of
those with him.[1609] As at the time I gave him leave to go, all the
Aūzbeg khāns and sulṯāns had laid siege to Balkh, [Sidenote: Fol. 256.]
I rode for Balkh as soon as I had given him his leave. On his reaching
Lāhor, he insisted to the begs, "You reinforce me; the Pādshāh said so;
march along with me; let us get (Apāq) Ghāzī Khān to join us; let us
move on Dihlī and Āgra." Said they, "Trusting to what, will you join
Ghāzī Khān? Moreover the royal orders to us were, 'If at any time Ghāzī
Khān has sent his younger brother Ḥājī Khān with his son to Court, join
him; or do so, if he has sent them, by way of pledge, to Lāhor; if he
has done neither, do not join him.' You yourself only yesterday fought
him and let him beat you! Trusting to what, will you join him now?
Besides all this, it is not for your advantage to join him!" Having said
what-not of this sort, they refused `Ālam Khān. He did not fall in with
their views, but sent his son Sher Khān to speak with Daulat Khān and
with Ghāzī Khān, and afterwards all saw one another.
`Ālam Khān took with him Dilāwar Khān, who had come into Lāhor two or
three months earlier after his escape from prison; he took also Maḥmūd
Khān (son of) Khān-i-jahān,[1610] to whom a _pargana_ in the Lāhor
district had been given. They seem to have left matters at this:—Daulat
Khān with Ghāzī Khān was to take all the begs posted in Hindūstān to
himself, indeed he was to take everything on that side;[1611] while
`Ālam [Sidenote: Fol. 256b.] Khān was to take Dilāwar Khān and Ḥājī Khān
and, reinforced by them, was to capture Dihlī and Āgra. Ismā`īl
_Jilwānī_ and other amīrs came and saw `Ālam Khān; all then betook
themselves, march by march, straight for Dihlī. Near Indrī came also
Sulaimān Shaikh-zāda.[1612] Their total touched 30 to 40,000 men.
They laid siege to Dihlī but could neither take it by assault nor do
hurt to the garrison.[1613] When Sl. Ibrāhīm heard of their assembly, he
got an army to horse against them; when they heard of his approach, they
rose from before the place and moved to meet him. They had left matters
at this:—"If we attack by day-light, the Afghāns will not desert (to
us), for the sake of their reputations with one another; but if we
attack at night when one man cannot see another, each man will obey his
own orders." Twice over they started at fall of day from a distance of
12 miles (6 _kurohs_), and, unable to bring matters to a point, neither
advanced nor retired; but just sat on horseback for two or three
watches. On a third occasion they delivered an attack when one watch of
night remained—their purpose seeming to be the burning of tents and
huts! They went; they set fire from every end; they made a disturbance.
Jalāl Khān _Jig-hat_[1614] came with other amīrs and saw `Ālam Khān.
Sl. Ibrāhīm did not bestir himself till shoot of dawn from where he was
with a few of his own family[1615] within his own enclosure (_sarācha_).
Meantime `Ālam Khān's people were busy [Sidenote: Fol. 257.] with
plunder and booty. Seeing the smallness of their number, Sl. Ibrāhīm's
people moved out against them in rather small force with one elephant.
`Ālam Khān's party, not able to make stand against the elephant, ran
away. He in his flight crossed over into the Mīān-dū-āb and crossed back
again when he reached the Pānīpat neighbourhood. In Indrī he contrived
on some pretext to get 4 _laks_ from Mīān Sulaimān.[1616] He was
deserted by Ismā`īl _Jilwānī_, by Biban[1617] and by his own oldest son
Jalāl, who all withdrew into the Mīān-dū-āb; and he had been deserted
just before the fighting, by part of his troops, namely, by Daryā Khān
(_Nūḥānī_)'s son Saif Khān, by Khān-i-jahān (_Nūḥānī_)'s son Maḥmūd
Khān, and by Shaikh Jamāl _Farmulī_. When he was passing through Sihrind
with Dilāwar Khān, he heard of our advance and of our capture of Milwat
(Malot).[1618] On this Dilāwar Khān—who always had been my well-wisher
and on my account had dragged out three or four months in prison,—left
`Ālam Khān and the rest and went to his family in Sulṯānpūr. He waited
on me three or four days after we took Milwat. `Ālam Khān and Ḥājī Khān
crossed the Shatlut (_sic_)-water and went into Gingūta,[1619] one of
the strongholds in the range that lies between the valley and the
plain.[1620] There our Afghān and Hazāra[1621] troops besieged them, and
had [Sidenote: Fol. 257b] almost taken that strong fort when night came
on. Those inside were thinking of escape but could not get out because
of the press of horses in the Gate. There must have been elephants also;
when these were urged forward, they trod down and killed many horses.
`Ālam Khān, unable to escape mounted, got out on foot in the darkness.
After a _lak_ of difficulties, he joined Ghāzī Khān, who had not gone
into Milwat but had fled into the hills. Not being received with even a
little friendliness by Ghāzī Khān; needs must! he came and waited on me
at the foot of the dale[1622] near Pehlūr.
(_k. Diary resumed._)
A person came to Sīālkot from the Lāhor begs to say they would arrive
early next morning to wait on me.
(_Dec. 30th_) Marching early next day (Rabī` I. 15th), we dismounted at
Parsrūr. There Muḥ. `Alī _Jang-jang_, Khwāja Ḥusain and several braves
waited on me. As the enemy's camp seemed to be on the Lāhor side of the
Rāvī, we sent men out under Būjka for news. Near the third watch of the
night they brought word that the enemy, on hearing of us, had fled, no
man looking to another.
(_Dec. 31st_) Getting early to horse and leaving baggage and train in
the charge of Shāh Mīr Ḥusain and Jān Beg, we bestirred ourselves. We
reached Kalānūr in the afternoon, and there dismounted. Muḥammad Sl.
Mīrzā and `Ādil Sl.[1623] came [Sidenote: Fol. 258.] to wait on me
there, together with some of the begs.
(_Jan. 1st 1526 AD._) We marched early from Kalānūr. On the road people
gave us almost certain news of Ghāzī Khān and other fugitives.
Accordingly we sent, flying after those fliers, the commanders
Muḥammadī, Aḥmadī, Qūtlūq-qadam, Treasurer Walī and most of those begs
who, in Kābul, had recently bent the knee for their begship. So far it
was settled:—That it would be good indeed if they could overtake and
capture the fugitives; and that, if they were not able to do this, they
were to keep careful watch round Milwat (Malot), so as to prevent those
inside from getting out and away. Ghāzī Khān was the object of this
watch.
(_l. Capture of Milwat._)
(_Jan. 2nd and 3rd_) After starting those begs ahead, we crossed the
Bīāh-water (Beas) opposite Kanwāhīn[1624] and dismounted. From there we
marched to the foot of the valley of Fort Milwat, making two night-halts
on the way. The begs who had arrived before us, and also those of
Hindūstān were ordered to dismount in such a way as to besiege the place
closely.
A grandson of Daulat Khān, son of his eldest son `Alī Khān, Ismā`īl Khān
by name, came out of Milwat to see me; he took back promise mingled with
threat, kindness with menace.
(_Jan. 5th_) On Friday (Rabī` I. 21st) I moved camp forward to within a
mile of the fort, went myself to examine the place, posted right, left
and centre, then returned to camp.
Daulat Khān sent to represent to me that Ghāzī Khān had [Sidenote: Fol.
258b.] fled into the hills, and that, if his own faults were pardoned,
he would take service with me and surrender Milwat. Khwāja Mīr-i-mīrān
was sent to chase fear from his heart and to escort him out; he came,
and with him his son `Alī Khān. I had ordered that the two swords he had
girt to his waist to fight me with, should be hung from his neck. Was
such a rustic blockhead possible! With things as they were, he still
made pretensions! When he was brought a little forward, I ordered the
swords to be removed from his neck. At the time of our seeing one
another[1625] he hesitated to kneel; I ordered them to pull his leg and
make him do so. I had him seated quite in front, and ordered a person
well acquainted with Hindūstānī to interpret my words to him, one after
another. Said I, "Thus speak:—I called thee Father. I shewed thee more
honour and respect than thou couldst have asked. Thee and thy sons I
saved from door-to-door life amongst the Balūchīs.[1626] Thy family and
thy _ḥaram_ I freed from Ibrāhīm's prison-house.[1627] Three _krors_ I
gave thee on Tātār Khān's lands.[1628] What ill sayest thou I have done
thee, that thus thou shouldst hang a sword on thy either side,[1629]
lead an army out, fall on lands of ours,[1630] and stir strife and
trouble?" Dumbfounded, the old man [Sidenote: Fol. 259.] stuttered a
few words, but, he gave no answer, nor indeed could answer be given to
words so silencing. He was ordered to remain with Khwāja Mīr-i-mīrān.
(_Jan. 6th_) On Saturday the 22nd of the first Rabī`, I went myself to
safeguard the exit of the families and _ḥarams_[1631] from the fort,
dismounting on a rise opposite the Gate. To me there came `Alī Khān and
made offering of a few _ashrafīs_. People began to bring out the
families just before the Other Prayer. Though Ghāzī Khān was reported to
have got away, there were some who said they had seen him in the fort.
For this reason several of the household and braves[1632] were posted at
the Gate, in order to prevent his escape by a ruse, for to get away was
his full intention.[1633] Moreover if jewels and other valuables were
being taken away by stealth, they were to be confiscated. I spent that
night in a tent pitched on the rise in front of the Gate.
(_Jan. 7th_) Early next morning, Muḥammadī, Aḥmadī, Sl. Junaid,
`Abdu'l-`azīz, Muḥammad `Alī _Jang-jang_ and Qūtlūq-qadam were ordered
to enter the fort and take possession of all [Sidenote: Fol. 259b.]
effects. As there was much disturbance at the Gate, I shot off a few
arrows by way of chastisement. Humāyūn's story-teller (_qiṣṣa-khẉān_)
was struck by the arrow of his destiny and at once surrendered his life.
(_Jan. 7th and 8th_) After spending two nights[1634] on the rise, I
inspected the fort. I went into Ghāzī Khān's book-room;[1635] some of
the precious things found in it, I gave to Humāyūn, some sent to Kāmrān
(in Qandahār). There were many books of learned contents,[1636] but not
so many valuable ones as had at first appeared. I passed that night in
the fort; next morning I went back to camp.
(_Jan. 9th_) It had been in our minds that Ghāzī Khān was in the fort,
but he, a man devoid of nice sense of honour, had escaped to the hills,
abandoning father, brethren and sisters in Milwat.
See that man without honour who never
The face of good luck shall behold;
Bodily ease he chose for himself,
In hardship he left wife and child (_Gulistān_ cap. i, story 17).
(_Jan. 10th_) Leaving that camp on Wednesday, we moved towards the hills
to which Ghāzī Khān had fled. When we dismounted in the valley-bottom
two miles from the camp in the mouth of Milwat,[1637] Dilāwar Khān came
and waited on me. Daulat Khān, `Alī Khān and Ismā`īl Khān, with other
chiefs, were given into Kitta Beg's charge who was to convey them to the
Bhīra fort of Milwat (Malot),[1638] and there keep guard over [Sidenote:
Fol. 260.] them. In agreement with Dilāwar Khān, blood-ransom was fixed
for some who had been made over each to one man; some gave security,
some were kept prisoner. Daulat Khān died when Kitta Beg reached
Sulṯānpūr with the prisoners.[1639]
Milwat was given into the charge of Muḥ. `Alī _Jang-jang_ who, pledging
his own life for it, left his elder brother Arghūn and a party of braves
in it. A body of from 200 to 250 Afghāns were told off to reinforce him.
Khwāja Kalān had loaded several camels with Ghaznī wines. A party was
held in his quarters overlooking the fort and the whole camp, some
drinking _`araq_, some wine. It was a varied party.
(_m. Jaswān-valley._)
Marching on, we crossed a low hill of the grazing-grounds
(_arghā-dāl-līq_) of Milwat and went into the _dūn_, as Hindūstānīs
are understood to call a dale (_julga_).[1640] In this dale is a
running-water[1641] of Hindūstān; along its sides are many villages; and
it is said to be the pargana of the Jaswāl, that is to say, of Dilāwar
Khān's maternal uncles. It lies there shut-in, with meadows along its
torrent, rice cultivated here and there, a three or four mill-stream
flowing in its trough, its width from two to [Sidenote: Fol. 260b.] four
miles, six even in places, villages on the skirts of its hills—hillocks
they are rather—where there are no villages, peacocks, monkeys, and many
fowls which, except that they are mostly of one colour, are exactly like
house-fowls.
As no reliable news was had of Ghāzī Khān, we arranged for Tardīka to go
with Bīrīm Deo _Malinhās_ and capture him wherever he might be found.
In the hills of this dale stand thoroughly strong forts; one on the
north-east, named Kūtila, has sides 70 to 80 yards (_qārī_) of straight
fall, the side where the great gate is being perhaps 7 or 8 yards.[1642]
The width of the place where the draw-bridge is made, may be 10 to 12
yards. Across this they have made a bridge of two tall trees[1643] by
which horses and herds are taken over. This was one of the local forts
Ghāzī Khān had strengthened; his man will have been in it now. Our
raiders (_chāpqūnchī_) assaulted it and had almost taken it when night
came on. The garrison abandoned this difficult place and went off. Near
this dale is also the stronghold of Ginguta; it is girt round by
precipices as Kūtila is, but is not so strong as Kūtila. As has been
mentioned `Ālam Khān went into it.[1644] [Sidenote: Fol. 261.]
(_n. Bābur advances against Ibrāhīm._)
After despatching the light troop against Ghāzī Khān, I put my foot in
the stirrup of resolution, set my hand on the rein of trust in God, and
moved forward against Sulṯān Ibrāhīm, son of Sulṯān Sikandar, son of
Buhlūl _Lūdī Afghān_, in possession of whose throne at that time were
the Dihlī capital and the dominions of Hindūstān, whose standing-army
was called a _lak_ (100,000), whose elephants and whose begs' elephants
were about 1,000.
At the end of our first stage, I bestowed Dībālpūr on Bāqī
_shaghāwal_[1645] and sent him to help Balkh[1646]; sent also gifts,
taken in the success of Milwat, for (my) younger children and various
train in Kābul.
When we had made one or two marches down the (Jaswān) _dūn_, Shāh `Imād
_Shīrāzī_ arrived from Araish Khān and Mullā Muḥammad _Maẕhab_,[1647]
bringing letters that conveyed their good wishes for the complete
success of our campaign and indicated their effort and endeavour towards
this. In response, we sent, by a foot-man, royal letters expressing our
favour. We then marched on.
(_o. `Ālam Khān takes refuge with Bābur._)
The light troop we had sent out from Milwat (Malot), took Hurūr, Kahlūr
and all the hill-forts of the neighbourhood—places to which because of
their strength, no-one seemed to have gone for a long time—and came back
to me after plundering a little. Came also `Ālam Khān, on foot, ruined,
stripped bare. We sent some of the begs to give him honourable meeting,
sent horses too, and he waited (_malāẓamat qīldī_) in that [Sidenote:
Fol. 261b.] neighbourhood.[1648]
Raiders of ours went into the hills and valleys round-about, but after a
few nights' absence, came back without anything to count. Shāh Mīr
Ḥusain, Jān Beg and a few of the braves asked leave and went off for a
raid.
(_p. Incidents of the march for Pānī-pat._)
While we were in the (Jaswān) _dūn_, dutiful letters had come more than
once from Ismā`īl _Jilwānī_ and Biban; we replied to them from this
place by royal letters such as their hearts desired. After we got out of
the dale to Rūpar, it rained very much and became so cold that a mass of
starved and naked Hindūstānīs died.
When we had left Rūpar and were dismounted at Karal,[1649] opposite
Sihrind, a Hindūstānī coming said, "I am Sl. Ibrāhīm's envoy," and
though he had no letter or credentials, asked for an envoy from us. We
responded at once by sending one or two Sawādī night-guards
(_tunqiṯār_).[1650] These humble persons Ibrāhīm put in prison; they
made their escape and came back to us on the very day we beat him.
After having halted one night on the way, we dismounted on the bank of
the torrent[1651] of Banūr and Sanūr. Great rivers apart, one running
water there is in Hindūstān, is this[1652]; they call it the water of
Kakar (Ghaggar). Chitr also is on its bank. We rode up it for an
excursion. The rising-place (_zih_) of the water of this torrent (_rūd_)
is 3 or 4 _kurohs_ (6-8 m.) above Chitr. Going up the (Kakar) torrent,
we came to where a 4 or 5 millstream issues from a broad (side-)valley
(_dara_), up which there [Sidenote: Fol. 262.] are very pleasant places,
healthy and convenient. I ordered a Chār-bāgh to be made at the mouth of
the broad valley of this (tributary) water, which falls into the
(Kakar-) torrent after flowing for one or two _kurohs_ through level
ground. From its infall to the springs of the Kakar the distance may be
3 to 4 _kurohs_ (6-8 m.). When it comes down in flood during the rains
and joins the Kakar, they go together to Sāmāna and Sanām.[1653]
In this camp we heard that Sl. Ibrāhīm had been on our side of
Dihlī and had moved on from that station, also that Ḥamīd Khān
_khāṣa-khail_,[1654] the military-collector (_shiqdār_) of Ḥiṣār-fīrūza,
had left that place with its army and with the army of its
neighbourhood, and had advanced 10 or 15 _kurohs_ (20-30 m.). Kitta Beg
was sent for news to Ibrāhīm's camp, and Mumin Ātaka to the Ḥiṣār-fīrūza
camp.
(_q. Humāyūn moves against Ḥamīd Khān._)
(_Feb. 25th_) Marching from Aṃbāla, we dismounted by the side of a lake.
There Mumin Ātāka and Kitta Beg rejoined us, both on the same day,
Sunday the 13th of the first Jumāda.
We appointed Humāyūn to act against Ḥamīd Khān, and joined the whole of
the right (wing) to him, that is to say, Khwāja Kalān, Sl. Muḥammad
_Dūldāī_, Treasurer Walī, and also some of the begs whose posts were in
Hindūstān, namely, Khusrau, Hindū Beg,`Abdu'l-'azīz and Muḥammad `Alī
_Jang-jang_, with also, from the household and braves of the centre,
Shāh Manṣūr _Barlās_, Kitta Beg and Muḥibb-i `alī. [Sidenote: Fol.
262b.]
Biban waited on me in this camp. These Afghāns remain very rustic and
tactless! This person asked to sit although Dilāwar Khān, his superior
in following and in rank, did not sit, and although the sons of `Ālam
Khān, who are of royal birth, did not sit. Little ear was lent to his
unreason!
(_Feb. 26th_) At dawn on Monday the 14th Humāyūn moved out against Ḥamīd
Khān. After advancing for some distance, he sent between 100 and 150
braves scouting ahead, who went close up to the enemy and at once got to
grips. But when after a few encounters, the dark mass of Humāyūn's
troops shewed in the rear, the enemy ran right away. Humāyūn's men
unhorsed from 100 to 200, struck the heads off one half and brought the
other half in, together with 7 or 8 elephants.
(_March 2nd_) On Friday the 18th of the month, Beg Mīrak _Mughūl_
brought news of Humāyūn's victory to the camp. He (Humāyūn?) was there
and then given a special head-to-foot and a special horse from the royal
stable, besides promise of guerdon (_juldū_).
(_March 5th_) On Monday the 25th of the month, Humāyūn arrived to wait
on me, bringing with him as many as 100 prisoners and 7 or 8 elephants.
Ustād `Alī-qulī and the [Sidenote: Fol. 263.] matchlockmen were ordered
to shoot all the prisoners, by way of example. This had been Humāyūn's
first affair, his first experience of battle; it was an excellent omen!
Our men who had gone in pursuit of the fugitives, took Ḥiṣār-fīrūza at
once on arrival, plundered it, and returned to us. It was given in
guerdon to Humāyūn, with all its dependencies and appurtenances, with it
also a _kror_ of money.
We marched from that camp to Shāhābād. After we had despatched a
news-gatherer (_tīl-tūtār kīshī_) to Sl. Ibrāhīm's camp, we stayed a few
days on that ground. Raḥmat the foot-man was sent with the letters of
victory to Kābul.
(_r. News of Ibrāhīm._)
(_March 13th_) On Monday the 28th of the first Jumāda,[1655] we being in
that same camp, the Sun entered the Sign of the Ram. News had come
again and again from Ibrāhīm's camp, "He is coming, marching two miles"
or "four miles", "stopping in each camp two days," or "three days". We
for our part advanced from Shāhābād and after halting on two nights,
reached the bank of the Jūn-river (Jumna) and encamped opposite Sarsāwa.
From that ground Khwāja Kalān's servant Ḥaidar-qulī was sent to get news
(_tīl tūtā_).
Having crossed the Jūn-river at a ford, I visited Sarsāwa. That day also
we ate _ma`jūn_. Sarsāwa[1656] has a source (_chashma_) from which a
smallish stream issues, not a bad place! Tardī Beg _khāksār_ praising
it, I said, "Let it be thine!" so just [Sidenote: Fol. 263b.] because he
praised it, Sarsāwa was given to him!
I had a platform fixed in a boat and used to go for excursions on the
river, sometimes too made the marches down it. Two marches along its
bank had been made when, of those sent to gather news, Ḥaidar-qulī
brought word that Ibrāhīm had sent Daud Khān (_Lūdī_) and Ḥātīm Khān
(_Lūdī_) across the river into the Mīān-dū-āb (Tween-waters) with 5 or
6000 men, and that these lay encamped some 6 or 7 miles from his own.
(_s. A successful encounter._)
(_April 1st_) On Sunday the 18th of the second Jumāda, we sent, to ride
light against this force, Chīn-tīmūr Sulṯān,[1657] Mahdī Khwāja,
Muḥammad Sl. Mīrzā, `Ādil Sulṯān, and the whole of the left, namely, Sl.
Junaid, Shāh Mīr Ḥusain, Qūtlūq-qadam, and with them also sent
`Abdu'l-lāh and Kitta Beg (of the centre). They crossed from our side of
the water at the Mid-day Prayer, and between the Afternoon and the
Evening Prayers bestirred themselves from the other bank. Biban having
crossed the water on pretext of this movement, ran away.
(_April 2nd_) At day-break they came upon the enemy;[1658] he made as if
coming out in a sort of array, but our men closed with his at once,
overcame them, hustled them off, pursued and unhorsed them till they
were opposite Ibrāhīm's own camp. Ḥātim Khān was one of those unhorsed,
who was Daud Khān (_Lūdī_)'s elder brother and one of his commanders.
Our men brought him in when they waited on me. They brought also
[Sidenote: Fol. 264.] 60-70 prisoners and 6 or 7 elephants. Most of the
prisoners, by way of warning, were made to reach their death-doom.
(_t. Preparations for battle._)
While we were marching on in array of right, left and centre, the army
was numbered;[1659] it did not count up to what had been estimated.
At our next camp it was ordered that every man in the army should
collect carts, each one according to his circumstances. Seven hundred
carts (_arāba_) were brought[1660] in. The order given to Ustād
`Alī-qulī was that these carts should be joined together in
Ottoman[1661] fashion, but using ropes of raw hide instead of chains,
and that between every two carts 5 or 6 mantelets should be fixed,
behind which the matchlockmen were to stand to fire. To allow of
collecting all appliances, we delayed 5 or 6 days in that camp. When
everything was ready, all the begs with such braves as had had
experience in military affairs were summoned to a General Council where
opinion found decision at this:—Pānī-pat[1662] is there with its crowded
houses and suburbs. It would be on one side of us; our other sides must
be protected by carts and mantelets behind which our foot and
matchlockmen would stand. With so much settled we marched forward,
halted one night on the way, and reached Pānī-pat on Thursday the last
day (29th) of the second Jumāda (April 12th).
(_u. The opposed forces._)
On our right was the town of Pānī-pat with its suburbs; in front of us
were the carts and mantelets we had prepared; on our left and elsewhere
were ditch and branch. At distances of [Sidenote: Fol. 264b.] an arrow's
flight[1663] sally-places were left for from 100 to 200 horsemen.
Some in the army were very anxious and full of fear. Nothing recommends
anxiety and fear. For why? Because what God has fixed in eternity cannot
be changed. But though this is so, it was no reproach to be afraid and
anxious. For why? Because those thus anxious and afraid were there with
a two or three months' journey between them and their homes; our affair
was with a foreign tribe and people; none knew their tongue, nor did
they know ours:—
A wandering band, with mind awander;
In the grip of a tribe, a tribe unfamiliar.[1664]
People estimated the army opposing us at 100,000 men; Ibrāhīm's
elephants and those of his amīrs were said to be about 1000. In his
hands was the treasure of two forbears.[1665] In Hindūstān, when work
such as this has to be done, it is customary to pay out money to hired
retainers who are known as _b:d-hindī_.[1666] If it had occurred to
Ibrāhīm to do this, he might have had another _lak_ or two of troops.
God brought it right! Ibrāhīm could neither content his braves, nor
share out his treasure. How should he content his braves when he was
ruled by avarice and had a craving insatiable to pile coin on coin? He
was an unproved brave[1667]; he provided nothing for his [Sidenote: Fol.
265.] military operations, he perfected nothing, nor stand, nor move,
nor fight.
In the interval at Pānī-pat during which the army was preparing defence
on our every side with cart, ditch and branch, Darwīsh-i-muḥammad
_Sārbān_ had once said to me, "With such precautions taken, how is it
possible for him to come?" Said I, "Are you likening him to the Aūzbeg
khāns and sulṯāns? In what of movement under arms or of planned
operations is he to be compared with them?" God brought it right! Things
fell out just as I said!
(_Author's note on the Aūzbeg chiefs._) When I reached Ḥiṣār
in the year I left Samarkand (918 AH.-1512 AD.), and all the
Aūzbeg khāns and sulṯāns gathered and came against us, we
brought the families and the goods of the Mughūls and soldiers
into the Ḥiṣār suburbs and fortified these by closing the
lanes. As those khāns and sulṯāns were experienced in
equipment, in planned operations, and in resolute resistance,
they saw from our fortification of Ḥiṣār that we were
determined on life or death within it, saw they could not
count on taking it by assault and, therefore, retired at once
from near Nūndāk of Chaghānīān.
(_v. Preliminary encounters._)
During the 7 or 8 days we lay in Pānī-pat, our men used to go, a few
together, close up to Ibrāhīm's camp, rain arrows down on his massed
troops, cut off and bring in heads. Still he made [Sidenote: Fol. 265b.]
no move; nor did his troops sally out. At length, we acted on the advice
of several Hindūstānī well-wishers and sent out 4 or 5000 men to deliver
a night-attack on his camp, the leaders of it being Mahdī Khwāja,
Muḥammad Sl. Mīrzā, `Ādil Sulṯān, Khusrau, Shāh Mīr Ḥusain, Sl. Junaid
_Barlās_, `Abdu'l-`azīz the Master of the Horse, Muḥ. `Alī _Jang-jang_,
Qūtlūq-qadam, Treasurer Walī, Khalīfa's Muḥibb-i-`alī, Pay-master
Muḥammad, Jān Beg and Qarā-qūzī. It being dark, they were not able to
act together well, and, having scattered, could effect nothing on
arrival. They stayed near Ibrāhīm's camp till dawn, when the nagarets
sounded and troops of his came out in array with elephants. Though our
men did not do their work, they got off safe and sound; not a man of
them was killed, though they were in touch with such a mass of foes. One
arrow pierced Muḥ. `Alī _Jang-jang_'s leg; though the wound was not
mortal, he was good-for-nothing on the day of battle.
On hearing of this affair, I sent off Humāyūn and his troops to go 2 or
3 miles to meet them, and followed him myself with the rest of the army
in battle-array. The party of the night-attack joined him and came back
with him. The enemy making no further advance, we returned to camp and
dismounted. That night a false alarm fell on the camp; for some 20
minutes (one _garī_) there were uproar and call-to-arms; the disturbance
died down after a time. [Sidenote: Fol. 266.]
(_w. Battle of Pānī-pat._[1668])
(_April 20th_) On Friday the 8th of Rajab,[1669] news came, when it was
light enough to distinguish one thing from another (_farẓ-waqtī_) that
the enemy was advancing in fighting-array. We at once put on mail,[1670]
armed and mounted.[1671] Our right was Humāyūn, Khwāja Kalān, Sulṯān
Muḥammad _Dūldāī_, Hindū Beg, Treasurer Walī and Pīr-qulī _Sīstānī_; our
left was Muḥammad Sl. Mīrzā, Mahdī Khwāja, `Ādil Sulṯān, Shāh Mīr
Ḥusain, Sl. Junaid _Barlās_, Qūtlūq-qadam, Jān Beg, Pay-master Muḥammad,
and Shāh Ḥusain (of) Yāragī _Mughūl Ghānchī_(?).[1672] The right hand of
the centre[1673] was Chīn-tīmūr Sulṯān, Sulaimān Mīrzā,[1674] Muḥammadī
Kūkūldāsh, Shāh Manṣūr _Barlās_, Yūnas-i-`alī, Darwīsh-i-muḥammad
_Sārbān_ and `Abdu'l-lāh the librarian. The left of the centre was
Khalīfa, Khwāja Mīr-i-mīrān, Secretary Aḥmadī, Tardī Beg (brother) of
Qūj Beg, Khalīfa's Muḥibb-i-`alī and Mīrzā Beg Tarkhān. The advance was
Khusrau Kūkūldāsh and Muḥ. `Alī _Jang-jang_. `Abdu'l-'azīz the Master
of the Horse was posted as the reserve. For the turning-party
(_tūlghuma_) at the point of the right wing,[1675] we fixed on Red Walī
and Malik Qāsim (brother) of Bābā _Qashqa_, with their Mughūls; for the
turning-party at the point of the left wing, we arrayed Qarā-qūzī,
Abū'l-muḥammad the lance-player, Shaikh Jamāl _Bārīn's_ Shaikh `Alī,
Mahndī(?) and Tīngrī-bīrdī _Bashaghī_(?) _Mughūl_; these two parties,
directly the enemy got near, were to turn his rear, one from the right,
the other from the left. [Sidenote: Fol. 266b.]
When the dark mass of the enemy first came in sight, he seemed to
incline towards our right; `Abdu'l-`azīz, who was the right-reserve, was
sent therefore to reinforce the right. From the time that Sl. Ibrāhīm's
blackness first appeared, he moved swiftly, straight for us, without a
check, until he saw the dark mass of our men, when his pulled up and,
observing our formation and array,[1676] made as if asking, "To stand or
not? To advance or not?" They could not stand; nor could they make their
former swift advance.
Our orders were for the turning-parties to wheel from right and left to
the enemy's rear, to discharge arrows and to engage in the fight; and
for the right and left (wings) to advance and join battle with him. The
turning-parties wheeled round and began to rain arrows down. Mahdī
Khwāja was the first of the left to engage; he was faced by a troop
having an elephant with it; his men's flights of arrows forced it to
retire. To reinforce the left I sent Secretary Aḥmadī and also Qūj Beg's
Tardī Beg and Khalīfa's Muḥibb-i-'alī. On the right also there was some
stubborn fighting. Orders were given for Muḥammadī Kūkūldāsh, Shāh
Manṣūr _Barlās_, Yūnas-i-`alī and `Abdu'l-lāh to engage those facing
them in front of the centre. From that same position Ustād `Alī-qulī
made good discharge of _firingī_ shots;[1677]
Musṯafa the commissary for his part made excellent discharge [Sidenote:
Fol. 267.] of _zarb-zan_ shots from the left hand of the centre. Our
right, left, centre and turning-parties having surrounded the enemy,
rained arrows down on him and fought ungrudgingly. He made one or two
small charges on our right and left but under our men's arrows, fell
back on his own centre. His right and left hands (_qūl_) were massed in
such a crowd that they could neither move forward against us nor force a
way for flight.
When the incitement to battle had come, the Sun was spear-high; till
mid-day fighting had been in full force; noon passed, the foe was
crushed in defeat, our friends rejoicing and gay. By God's mercy and
kindness, this difficult affair was made easy for us! In one half-day,
that armed mass was laid upon the earth. Five or six thousand men were
killed in one place close to Ibrāhīm. Our estimate of the other dead,
lying all over the field, was 15 to 16,000, but it came to be known,
later in Āgra from the statements of Hindūstānīs, that 40 or 50,000 may
have died in that battle.[1678]
The foe defeated, pursuit and unhorsing of fugitives began. Our men
brought in amīrs of all ranks and the chiefs they captured; _mahauts_
made offering of herd after herd of elephants.
Ibrāhīm was thought to have fled; therefore, while pursuing [Sidenote:
Fol. 267b.] the enemy, we told off Qismatāī Mīrzā, Bābā _chuhra_ and
Būjka of the _khaṣa-tābīn_[1679] to lead swift pursuit to Āgra and try
to take him. We passed through his camp, looked into his own enclosure
(_sarācha_) and quarters, and dismounted on the bank of standing-water
(_qarā-sū_).
It was the Afternoon Prayer when Khalīfa's younger brother-in-law T̤āhir
Tībrī[1680] who had found Ibrāhīm's body in a heap of dead, brought in
his head.
(_x. Detachments sent to occupy Dihlī and Āgra._)
On that very same day we appointed Humāyūn Mīrzā[1681] to ride fast and
light to Āgra with Khwāja Kalān, Muḥammadī, Shāh Manṣūr _Barlās_,
Yūnas-i-`alī, `Abdu'l-lah and Treasurer Walī, to get the place into
their hands and to mount guard over the treasure. We fixed on Mahdī
Khwāja, with Muḥammad Sl. Mīrza, `Ādil Sulṯān, Sl. Junaid _Barlās_ and
Qūtlūq-qadam to leave their baggage, make sudden incursion on Dihlī, and
keep watch on the treasuries.[1682]
(_April 21st_) We marched on next day and when we had gone 2 miles,
dismounted, for the sake of the horses, on the bank of the Jūn (Jumna).
(_April 24th_) On Tuesday (Rajab 12th), after we had halted on two
nights and had made the circuit of Shaikh Niẓāmu'd-dīn _Auliyā_'s
tomb[1683] we dismounted on the bank of the Jūn over against
Dihlī.[1684] That same night, being Wednesday-eve, we made an excursion
into the fort of Dihlī and there spent the night.
(_April 25th_) Next day (Wednesday Rajab 13th) I made the circuit of
Khwāja Quṯbu'd-dīn's[1685] tomb and visited the tombs and residences of
Sl. Ghiyāṣu'd-dīn _Balban_[1686] and Sl. `Alāu'u'd-dīn [Sidenote: Fol.
268.] _Khiljī_,[1687] his Minār, and the Ḥauẓ-shamsī, Ḥauẓ-i-khaṣ and
the tombs and gardens of Sl. Buhlūl and Sl. Sikandar (_Lūdī_). Having
done this, we dismounted at the camp, went on a boat, and there _`araq_
was drunk.
We bestowed the Military Collectorate (_shiqdārlīghī_) of Dihlī on Red
Walī, made Dost Dīwān in the Dihlī district, sealed the treasuries, and
made them over to their charge.
(_April 26th_) On Thursday we dismounted on the bank of the Jūn, over
against Tūghlūqābād.[1688]
(_y. The khuṯba read for Bābur in Dihlī._)
(_April 27th_) On Friday (Rajab 15th) while we remained on the same
ground, Maulānā Maḥmūd and Shaikh Zain went with a few others into Dihlī
for the Congregational Prayer, read the _khuṯba_ in my name, distributed
a portion of money to the poor and needy,[1689] and returned to camp.
(_April 28th_) Leaving that ground on Saturday (Rajab 16th), we advanced
march by march for Āgra. I made an excursion to Tūghlūqābād and rejoined
the camp.
(_May 4th_) On Friday (Rajab 22nd), we dismounted at the mansion
(_manzil_) of Sulaimān _Farmulī_ in a suburb of Āgra, but as the place
was far from the fort, moved on the following day to Jalāl Khān
_Jig:hat's_ house.
On Humāyūn's arrival at Āgra, ahead of us, the garrison had made excuses
and false pretexts (about surrender). He and his noticing the want of
discipline there was, said, "The long hand may be laid on the Treasury"!
and so sat down to watch the roads out of Āgra till we should come.
(_z. The great diamond._)
In Sultan Ibrāhīm's defeat the Rāja of Gūālīār Bikramājīt the Hindū had
gone to hell.[1690] [Sidenote: Fol. 268b.]
(_Author's note on Bikramājīt._) The ancestors of Bikramājīt
had ruled in Gūālīār for more than a hundred years.[1691]
Sikandar (_Lūdī_) had sat down in Āgra for several years in
order to take the fort; later on, in Ibrāhīm's time, `Aẕim
Humāyūn _Sarwānī_[1692] had completely invested it for some
while; following this, it was taken on terms under which
Shamsābād was given in exchange for it.[1693]
Bikramājīt's children and family were in Āgra at the time of Ibrāhīm's
defeat. When Humāyūn reached Āgra, they must have been planning to flee,
but his postings of men (to watch the roads) prevented this and guard
was kept over them. Humāyūn himself did not let them go (_bārghālī
qūīmās_). They made him a voluntary offering of a mass of jewels and
valuables amongst which was the famous diamond which `Alāu'u'd-dīn must
have brought.[1694] Its reputation is that every appraiser has estimated
its value at two and a half days' food for the whole world. Apparently
it weighs 8 _mis̤qāls_.[1695] Humāyūn offered it to me when I arrived at
Āgra; I just gave it him back.
(_aa. Ibrāhīm's mother and entourage._)
Amongst men of mark who were in the fort, there were Malik Dād _Karānī_,
Millī _Sūrdūk_ and Fīrūz Khān _Mīwātī_. They, being convicted of false
dealing, were ordered out for capital punishment. Several persons
interceded for Malik Dād _Karānī_ and four or five days passed in
comings and goings before the matter was arranged. We then shewed to
them (all?) kindness and favour in agreement with the petition made for
them, and we restored them all their goods.[1696] A _pargana_ worth 7
_laks_[1697] was bestowed on Ibrāhīm's mother; _parganas_ were given
also to these begs of his.[1698] She was sent out of the fort with her
old servants and given encamping-ground (_yūrt_) two miles below
[Sidenote: Fol. 269.] Āgra.
(_May 10th_) I entered Āgra at the Afternoon Prayer of Thursday (Rajab
28th) and dismounted at the mansion (_manzil_) of Sl. Ibrāhīm.
EXPEDITIONS OF TRAMONTANE MUḤAMMADANS INTO HIND.
(_a. Bābur's five attempts on Hindūstān._)
From the date 910 at which the country of Kābul was conquered, down to
now (932 AH.) (my) desire for Hindūstān had been constant, but owing
sometimes to the feeble counsels of begs, sometimes to the
non-accompaniment of elder and younger brethren,[1699] a move on
Hindūstān had not been practicable and its territories had remained
unsubdued. At length no such obstacles were left; no beg, great or small
(_beg begāt_) of lower birth,[1700] could speak an opposing word. In 925
AH. (1519 AD.) we led an army out and, after taking Bajaur by storm in
2-3 _garī_ (44-66 minutes), and making a general massacre of its people,
went on into Bhīra. Bhīra we neither over-ran nor plundered; we imposed
a ransom on its people, taking from them in money and goods to the value
of 4 _laks_ of _shāhrukhīs_ and having shared this out to the army and
auxiliaries, returned to Kābul. From then till now we laboriously held
tight[1701] to Hindūstān, five times leading an army into it.[1702] The
fifth time, God the Most High, by his own mercy and favour, made such a
foe as Sl. Ibrāhīm the vanquished and loser, such a realm as Hindūstān
our conquest and possession.
(_b. Three invaders from Tramontana._)
From the time of the revered Prophet down till now[1703] three men from
that side[1704] have conquered and ruled Hindūstān. Sl. Maḥmūd
_Ghāzī_[1705] was the first, who and whose descendants sat long on the
seat of government in Hindūstān. Sl. Shihābu'd-dīn [Sidenote: Fol.
269b.] of Ghūr was the second,[1706] whose slaves and dependants royally
shepherded[1707] this realm for many years. I am the third.
But my task was not like the task of those other rulers. For why?
Because Sl. Maḥmūd, when he conquered Hindūstān, had the throne of
Khurāsān subject to his rule, vassal and obedient to him were the
sulṯāns of Khwārizm and the Marches (_Dāru'l-marz_), and under his hand
was the ruler of Samarkand. Though his army may not have numbered 2
_laks_, what question is there that it[1708] was one. Then again, rājas
were his opponents; all Hindūstān was not under one supreme head
(_pādshāh_), but each rāja ruled independently in his own country. Sl.
Shihābu'd-dīn again,—though he himself had no rule in Khurāsān, his
elder brother Ghiyās̱u'd-dīn had it. The _T̤abaqāt-i-nāṣirī_[1709]
brings it forward that he once led into Hindūstān an army of 120,000
men and horse in mail.[1710] His opponents also were rāīs and rājas; one
man did not hold all Hindūstān.
That time we came to Bhīra, we had at most some 1500 to 2000 men. We had
made no previous move on Hindūstān with an army equal to that which came
the fifth time, when we beat Sl. Ibrāhīm and conquered the realm of
Hindūstān, the total written down for which, taking one retainer with
another, and [Sidenote: Fol. 270.] with traders and servants, was
12,000. Dependent on me were the countries of Badakhshān, Qūndūz, Kābul
and Qandahār, but no reckonable profit came from them, rather it was
necessary to reinforce them fully because several lie close to an enemy.
Then again, all Māwarā'u'n-nahr was in the power of the Aūzbeg khāns and
sulṯāns, an ancient foe whose armies counted up to 100,000. Moreover
Hindūstān, from Bhīra to Bihār, was in the power of the Afghāns and in
it Sl. Ibrāhīm was supreme. In proportion to his territory his army
ought to have been 5 _laks_, but at that time the Eastern amīrs were in
hostility to him. His army was estimated at 100,000 and people said his
elephants and those of his amīrs were 1000.
Under such conditions, in this strength, and having in my rear 100,000
old enemies such as are the Aūzbegs, we put trust in God and faced the
ruler of such a dense army and of domains so wide. As our trust was in
Him, the most high God did not make our labour and hardships vain, but
defeated that powerful foe and conquered that broad realm. Not as due to
strength and effort of our own do we look upon this good fortune, but as
had solely through God's pleasure and kindness. We know that this
happiness was not the fruit of our own ambition and resolve, but that it
was purely from His mercy and favour.
DESCRIPTION OF HINDŪSTĀN.
(_a. Hindūstān._)
The country of Hindūstān is extensive, full of men, and full [Sidenote:
Fol. 270b.] of produce. On the east, south, and even on the west, it
ends at its great enclosing ocean (_muḥiṯ daryā-sī-gha_). On the north
it has mountains which connect with those of Hindū-kush, Kāfiristān and
Kashmīr. North-west of it lie Kābul, Ghaznī and Qandahār. Dihlī is held
(_aīrīmīsh_) to be the capital of the whole of Hindūstān. From the death
of Shihābu'd-dīn _Ghūrī_ (d. 602 AH.-1206 AD.) to the latter part of the
reign of Sl. Fīrūz Shāh (_Tūghlūq Turk_ d. 790 AH.-1388 AD.), the
greater part of Hindūstān must have been under the rule of the sulṯāns
of Dihlī.
(_b. Rulers contemporary with Bābur's conquest._)
At the date of my conquest of Hindūstān it was governed by five Musalmān
rulers (_pādshāh_)[1711] and two Pagans (_kāfir_). These were the
respected and independent rulers, but there were also, in the hills and
jungles, many rāīs and rājas, held in little esteem (_kīchīk karīm_).
First, there were the Afghāns who had possession of Dihlī, the capital,
and held the country from Bhīra to Bihār. Jūnpūr, before their time, had
been in possession of Sl. Ḥusain _Sharqī_ (Eastern)[1712] whose dynasty
Hindūstānīs call Pūrabī (Eastern). His ancestors will have been
cup-bearers in the presence of Sl. Fīrūz Shāh and those (Tūghlūq)
sulṯāns; they became supreme in Jūnpūr after his death.[1713] At that
time Dihlī was in the hands of Sl. `Alāu'u'd-dīn (`Ālam Khān) of the
Sayyid dynasty to whose ancestor Tīmūr Beg had given it when, after
having captured it, he went away.[1714] Sl. Buhlūl _Lūdī_ and his son
(Sikandar) got possession of the capital Jūnpūr and the capital Dihlī,
and brought both under one government (881 AH.-1476 AD.).
Secondly, there was Sl. Muḥammad Muz̤affer in Gujrāt; he departed from
the world a few days before the defeat of Sl. Ibrāhīm. He was skilled in
the Law, a ruler (_pādshāh_) seeking [Sidenote: Fol. 271.] after
knowledge, and a constant copyist of the Holy Book. His dynasty people
call Tānk.[1715] His ancestors also will have been wine-servers to Sl.
Fīrūz Shāh and those (Tūghlūq) sulṯāns; they became possessed of Gujrāt
after his death.
Thirdly, there were the Bāhmanīs of the Dakkan (Deccan, _i.e._ South),
but at the present time no independent authority is left them; their
great begs have laid hands on the whole country, and must be asked for
whatever is needed.[1716]
Fourthly, there was Sl. Maḥmūd in the country of Malwā, which people
call also Mandāū.[1717] His dynasty they call Khilīj (_Turk_). Rānā
Sangā had defeated Sl. Maḥmūd and taken possession of most of his
country. This dynasty also has become feeble. Sl. Maḥmūd's ancestors
also must have been cherished by Sl. Fīrūz Shāh; they became possessed
of the Malwā country after his death.[1718]
Fifthly, there was Naṣrat Shāh[1719] in the country of Bengal. His
father (Ḥusain Shāh), a sayyid styled `Alāu'u'd-dīn, had ruled in Bengal
and Naṣrat Shāh attained to rule by inheritance. A surprising custom in
Bengal is that hereditary succession is rare. The royal office is
permanent and there are permanent offices of amīrs, wazīrs and
manṣab-dārs (officials). It is the office that Bengalis regard with
respect. Attached to each office is a body of obedient, subordinate
retainers and servants. If the royal heart demand that a person should
be dismissed [Sidenote: Fol. 271b.] and another be appointed to sit in
his place, the whole body of subordinates attached to that office become
the (new) office-holder's. There is indeed this peculiarity of the royal
office itself that any person who kills the ruler (_pādshāh_) and seats
himself on the throne, becomes ruler himself; amīrs, wazīrs, soldiers
and peasants submit to him at once, obey him, and recognize him for the
rightful ruler his predecessor in office had been.[1720] Bengalis say,
"We are faithful to the throne; we loyally obey whoever occupies it."
As for instance, before the reign of Naṣrat Shāh's father `Alāu'u'd-dīn,
an Abyssinian (_Ḥabshī_, named Muz̤affar Shāh) had killed his sovereign
(Maḥmūd Shāh _Ilyās_), mounted the throne and ruled for some time.
`Alāu'u'd-dīn killed that Abyssinian, seated himself on the throne and
became ruler. When he died, his son (Naṣrat) became ruler by
inheritance. Another Bengali custom is to regard it as a disgraceful
fault in a new ruler if he expend and consume the treasure of his
predecessors. On coming to rule he must gather treasure of his own. To
amass treasure Bengalis regard as a glorious distinction. Another custom
in Bengal is that from ancient times _parganas_ have been assigned to
meet the charges of the treasury, stables, and all royal expenditure and
to defray these charges no impost is laid on other lands.
These five, mentioned above, were the great Musalmān rulers, honoured in
Hindūstān, many-legioned, and broad-landed. Of the Pagans the greater
both in territory and army, is the Rāja of Bījānagar.[1721] [Sidenote:
Fol. 272.]
The second is Rānā Sangā who in these latter days had grown great by his
own valour and sword. His original country was Chitūr; in the downfall
from power of the Mandāū sulṯāns, he became possessed of many of their
dependencies such as Rantanbūr, Sārangpūr, Bhīlsān and Chandīrī.
Chandīrī I stormed in 934 AH. (1528 A.D.)[1722] and, by God's pleasure,
took it in a few hours; in it was Rānā Sangā's great and trusted man
Midnī Rāo; we made general massacre of the Pagans in it and, as will be
narrated, converted what for many years had been a mansion of hostility,
into a mansion of Islām.
There are very many rāīs and rājas on all sides and quarters of
Hindūstān, some obedient to Islām, some, because of their remoteness or
because their places are fastnesses, not subject to Musalmān rule.
(_c. Of Hindūstān._)
Hindūstān is of the first climate, the second climate, and the third
climate; of the fourth climate it has none. It is a wonderful country.
Compared with our countries it is a different world; its mountains,
rivers, jungles and deserts, its towns, its cultivated lands, its
animals and plants, its peoples and their tongues, its rains, and its
winds, are all different. In some respects the hot-country (_garm-sīl_)
that depends on Kābul, is like Hindūstān, but in others, it is
different. Once the water of Sind is crossed, everything is in the
Hindūstān way (_ṯāriq_) [Sidenote: Fol. 272b.] land, water, tree, rock,
people and horde, opinion and custom.
(_d. Of the northern mountains._)
After crossing the Sind-river (eastwards), there are countries, in the
northern mountains mentioned above, appertaining to Kashmīr and once
included in it, although most of them, as for example, Paklī and
Shahmang (?), do not now obey it. Beyond Kashmīr there are countless
peoples and hordes, _parganas_ and cultivated lands, in the mountains.
As far as Bengal, as far indeed as the shore of the great ocean, the
peoples are without break. About this procession of men no-one has been
able to give authentic information in reply to our enquiries and
investigations. So far people have been saying that they call these
hill-men Kas.[1723] It has struck me that as a Hindūstānī pronounces
_shīn_ as _sīn_ (_i.e._ _sh_ as _s_), and as Kashmīr is the one
respectable town in these mountains, no other indeed being heard of,
Hindūstānīs might pronounce it Kasmīr.[1724] These people trade in
musk-bags, _b:ḥrī-qūṯās_,[1725] saffron, lead and copper.
Hindīs call these mountains Sawālak-parbat. In the Hindī tongue
_sawāī-lak_ means one lak and a quarter, that is, 125,000, and _parbat_
means a hill, which makes 125,000 hills.[1726] The snow on these
mountains never lessens; it is seen white from many districts of Hind,
as, for example, Lāhor, Sihrind and Saṃbal. The range, which in Kābul is
known as Hindū-kush, comes from Kābul eastwards into Hindūstān, with
slight inclination to the south. The Hindūstānāt[1727] are to the south
of it. Tībet lies to the north of it and of that unknown horde called
Kas. [Sidenote: Fol. 273.]
(_e. Of rivers._)
Many rivers rise in these mountains and flow through Hindūstān. Six rise
north of Sihrind, namely Sind, Bahat (Jīlam), Chān-āb [_sic_], Rāwī,
Bīāh, and Sutluj[1728]; all meet near Multān, flow westwards under the
name of Sind, pass through the Tatta country and fall into the
`Umān(-sea).
Besides these six there are others, such as Jūn (Jumna), Gang (Ganges),
Rahap (Raptī?), Gūmtī, Gagar (Ghaggar), Sirū, Gandak, and many more; all
unite with the Gang-daryā, flow east under its name, pass through the
Bengal country, and are poured into the great ocean. They all rise in
the Sawālak-parbat.
Many rivers rise in the Hindūstān hills, as, for instance, Chaṃbal,
Banās, Bītwī, and Sūn (Son). There is no snow whatever on these
mountains. Their waters also join the Gang-daryā.
(_f. Of the Arāvallī._)
Another Hindūstān range runs north and south. It begins in the Dihlī
country at a small rocky hill on which is Fīrūz Shāh's residence, called
Jahān-nāma,[1729] and, going on from there, appears near Dihlī in
detached, very low, scattered here and there, rocky [Sidenote: Fol.
273b.] little hills.[1730] Beyond Mīwāt, it enters the Bīāna country.
The hills of Sīkrī, Bārī and Dūlpūr are also part of this same including
(tūtā) range. The hills of Gūālīār—they write it Gālīūr—although they do
not connect with it, are off-sets of this range; so are the hills of
Rantanbūr, Chitūr, Chandīrī, and Mandāū. They are cut off from it in
some places by 7 to 8 _kurohs_ (14 to 16 m.). These hills are very low,
rough, rocky and jungly. No snow whatever falls on them. They are the
makers, in Hindūstān, of several rivers.
(_g. Irrigation._)
The greater part of the Hindūstān country is situated on level land.
Many though its towns and cultivated lands are, it nowhere has running
waters.[1731] Rivers and, in some places, standing-waters are its
"running-waters" (_āqār-sūlār_). Even where, as for some towns, it is
practicable to convey water by digging channels (_ārīq_), this is not
done. For not doing it there may be several reasons, one being that
water is not at all a necessity in cultivating crops and orchards.
Autumn crops grow by the downpour of the rains themselves; and strange
it is that spring crops grow even when no rain falls. To young trees
water is made to flow by means of buckets or a wheel. They are given
water constantly during two or three years; after which they need no
more. Some vegetables are watered constantly.
In Lāhor, Dībālpūr and those parts, people water by means of a wheel.
They make two circles of ropes long enough to suit the depth of the
well, fix strips of wood between them, and on these fasten pitchers. The
ropes with the wood and attached [Sidenote: Fol. 274.] pitchers are put
over the well-wheel. At one end of the wheel-axle a second wheel is
fixed, and close (_qāsh_) to it another on an upright axle. This last
wheel the bullock turns; its teeth catch in the teeth of the second, and
thus the wheel with the pitchers is turned. A trough is set where the
water empties from the pitchers and from this the water is conveyed
everywhere.
In Āgra, Chandwār, Bīāna and those parts, again, people water with a
bucket; this is a laborious and filthy way. At the well-edge they set up
a fork of wood, having a roller adjusted between the forks, tie a rope
to a large bucket, put the rope over the roller, and tie its other end
to the bullock. One person must drive the bullock, another empty the
bucket. Every time the bullock turns after having drawn the bucket out
of the well, that rope lies on the bullock-track, in pollution of urine
and dung, before it descends again into the well. To some crops needing
water, men and women carry it by repeated efforts in pitchers.[1732]
(_h. Other particulars about Hindūstān._)
The towns and country of Hindūstān are greatly wanting in charm. Its
towns and lands are all of one sort; there are no walls to the orchards
(_bāghāt_), and most places are on the dead level plain. Under the
monsoon-rains the banks of some of its rivers and torrents are worn into
deep channels, difficult and [Sidenote: Fol. 274b.] troublesome to pass
through anywhere. In many parts of the plains thorny jungle grows,
behind the good defence of which the people of the _pargana_ become
stubbornly rebellious and pay no taxes.
Except for the rivers and here and there standing-waters, there is
little "running-water". So much so is this that towns and countries
subsist on the water of wells or on such as collects in tanks during the
rains.
In Hindūstān hamlets and villages, towns indeed, are depopulated and set
up in a moment! If the people of a large town, one inhabited for years
even, flee from it, they do it in such a way that not a sign or trace of
them remains in a day or a day and a half.[1733] On the other hand, if
they fix their eyes on a place in which to settle, they need not dig
water-courses or construct dams because their crops are all
rain-grown,[1734] and as the population of Hindūstān is unlimited, it
swarms in. They make a tank or dig a well; they need not build houses or
set up walls—_khas_-grass (_Andropogon muricatum_) abounds, wood is
unlimited, huts are made, and straightway there is a village or a town!
(_i. Fauna of Hindūstān:—Mammals._)
The elephant, which Hindūstānīs call _hāt(h)ī_, is one of the wild
animals peculiar to Hindūstān. It inhabits the (western?) borders of the
Kālpī country, and becomes more numerous in its wild state the further
east one goes (in Kālpī?). From this tract it is that captured elephants
are brought; in Karrah and [Sidenote: Fol. 275.] Mānikpūr
elephant-catching is the work of 30 or 40 villages.[1735] People answer
(_jawāb bīrūrlār_) for them direct to the exchequer.[1736] The elephant
is an immense animal and very sagacious. If people speak to it, it
understands; if they command anything from it, it does it. Its value is
according to its size; it is sold by measure (_qārīlāb_); the larger it
is, the higher its price. People rumour that it is heard of in some
islands as 10 _qārī_[1737] high, but in this tract it[1738] is not seen
above 4 or 5. It eats and drinks entirely with its trunk; if it lose the
trunk, it cannot live. It has two great teeth (tusks) in its upper jaw,
one on each side of its trunk; by setting these against walls and trees,
it brings them down; with these it fights and does whatever hard tasks
fall to it. People call these ivory (_`āj_, var. _ghāj_); they are
highly valued by Hindūstānīs. The elephant has no hair.[1739] It is much
relied on by Hindūstānīs, accompanying every troop of their armies. It
has some useful qualities:—it crosses great rivers with ease, carrying a
mass of baggage, and three or four have gone dragging without trouble
the cart of the mortar (_qazān_) it takes four or five hundred men to
haul.[1740] But its stomach is large; one elephant eats the corn
(_būghūz_) of two strings (_qiṯār_) of camels.[1741]
The rhinoceros is another. This also is a large animal, equal [Sidenote:
Fol. 275b.] in bulk to perhaps three buffaloes. The opinion current in
those countries (Tramontana) that it can lift an elephant on its horn,
seems mistaken. It has a single horn on its nose, more than nine inches
(_qārīsh_) long; one of two _qārīsh_ is not seen.[1742] Out of one large
horn were made a drinking-vessel[1743] and a dice-box, leaving over [the
thickness of] 3 or 4 hands.[1744] The rhinoceros' hide is very thick;
an arrow shot from a stiff bow, drawn with full strength right up to the
arm-pit, if it pierce at all, might penetrate 4 inches (_aīlīk_, hands).
From the sides (_qāsh_) of its fore and hind legs,[1745] folds hang
which from a distance look like housings thrown over it. It resembles
the horse more than it does any other animal.[1746] As the horse has a
small stomach (appetite?), so has the rhinoceros; as in the horse a
piece of bone (pastern?) grows in place of small bones (T. _āshūq_, Fr.
_osselets_ (Zenker), knuckles), so one grows in the rhinoceros; as in
the horse's hand (_aīlīk_, Pers. _dast_) there is _kūmūk_ (or _gūmūk_, a
_tibia_, or marrow), so there is in the rhinoceros.[1747] It is more
ferocious than the elephant and cannot be made obedient and submissive.
There are masses of it in the Parashāwar and Hashnagar jungles, so too
between the Sind-river and the jungles of the Bhīra country. Masses
there are also on the banks of [Sidenote: Fol. 276.] the Sārū-river in
Hindūstān. Some were killed in the Parashāwar and Hashnagar jungles in
our moves on Hindūstān. It strikes powerfully with its horn; men and
horses enough have been horned in those hunts.[1748] In one of them the
horse of a _chuhra_ (brave) named Maqṣūd was tossed a spear's-length,
for which reason the man was nick-named the rhino's aim
(_maqṣūd-i-karg_).
The wild-buffalo[1749] is another. It is much larger than the (domestic)
buffalo and its horns do not turn back in the same way.[1750] It is a
mightily destructive and ferocious animal.
The _nīla-gāū_ (blue-bull)[1751] is another. It may stand as high as a
horse but is somewhat lighter in build. The male is bluish-gray, hence,
seemingly, people call it nīla-gāū. It has two rather small horns. On
its throat is a tuft of hair, nine inches long; (in this) it resembles
the yak.[1752] Its hoof is cleft (_aīrī_) like the hoof of cattle. The
doe is of the colour of the _būghū-marāl_[1753]; she, for her part, has
no horns and is plumper than the male.
The hog-deer (_kotah-pāīcha_) is another.[1754] It may be of the size of
the white deer (_āq kiyīk_). It has short legs, hence its name,
little-legged. Its horns are like a _būghū_'s but smaller; like the
_būghū_ it casts them every year. Being rather a poor runner, it does
not leave the jungle.
Another is a deer (_kiyīk_) after the fashion of the male deer (_aīrkākī
hūna_) of the _jīrān_.[1755] Its back is black, its belly white, its
horns longer than the _hūna's_, but more crooked. A Hindūstānī
[Sidenote: Fol. 276b.] calls it _kalahara_,[1756] a word which may have
been originally _kālā-haran_, black-buck, and which has been softened in
pronunciation to _kalahara_. The doe is light-coloured. By means of this
_kalahara_ people catch deer; they fasten a noose (_ḥalqa_) on its
horns, hang a stone as large as a ball[1757] on one of its feet, so as
to keep it from getting far away after it has brought about the capture
of a deer, and set it opposite wild deer when these are seen. As these
(_kalahara_) deer are singularly combative, advance to fight is made at
once. The two deer strike with their horns and push one another
backwards and forwards, during which the wild one's horns become
entangled in the net that is fast to the tame one's. If the wild one
would run away, the tame one does not go; it is impeded also by the
stone on its foot. People take many deer in this way; after capture they
tame them and use them in their turn to take others;[1758] they also set
them to fight at home; the deer fight very well.
There is a smaller deer (_kiyīk_) on the Hindūstān hill-skirts, as large
may-be as the one year's lamb of the _arqārghalcha_ (_Ovis poli_).
The _gīnī-cow_[1759] is another, a very small one, perhaps as large as
the _qūchqār_ (ram) of those countries (Tramontana). Its flesh is very
tender and savoury.
The monkey (_maimūn_) is another—a Hindūstānī calls it _bandar_. Of this
too there are many kinds, one being what people [Sidenote: Fol. 277.]
take to those countries. The jugglers (_lūlī_) teach them tricks. This
kind is in the mountains of Nūr-dara, in the skirt-hills of Safīd-koh
neighbouring on Khaibar, and from there downwards all through Hindūstān.
It is not found higher up. Its hair is yellow, its face white, its tail
not very long.—Another kind, not found in Bajaur, Sawād and those parts,
is much larger than the one taken to those countries (Tramontana). Its
tail is very long, its hair whitish, its face quite black. It is in the
mountains and jungles of Hindūstān.[1760]—Yet another kind is
distinguished (_būlā dūr_), quite black in hair, face and limbs.[1761]
The _nawal_ (_nūl_)[1762] is another. It may be somewhat smaller than
the _kīsh_. It climbs trees. Some call it the _mūsh-i-khūrma_
(palm-rat). It is thought lucky.
A mouse (T. _sīchqān_) people call _galāhrī_ (squirrel) is another. It
is just always in trees, running up and down with amazing alertness and
speed.[1763]
(_j. Fauna of Hindūstān:—Birds._)[1764]
The peacock (Ar. _ṯāūs_) is one. It is a beautifully coloured and
splendid animal. Its form (_andām_) is not equal to its colouring and
beauty. Its body may be as large as the crane's (_tūrna_) but it is not
so tall. On the head of both cock and hen are 20 to 30 feathers rising
some 2 or 3 inches high. The hen has neither colour nor beauty. The head
of the cock has an iridescent collar (_ṯauq sūsanī_); its neck is of a
beautiful blue; [Sidenote: Fol. 277b.] below the neck, its back is
painted in yellow, parrot-green, blue and violet colours. The
flowers[1765] on its back are much the smaller; below the back as far as
the tail-tips are [larger] flowers painted in the same colours. The tail
of some peacocks grows to the length of a man's extended arms.[1766] It
has a small tail under its flowered feathers, like the tail of other
birds; this ordinary tail and its primaries[1767] are red. It is in
Bajaur and Sawād and below them; it is not in Kunur [Kūnūr] and the
Lamghānāt or any place above them. Its flight is feebler than the
pheasant's (_qīrghāwal_); it cannot do more than make one or two short
flights.[1768] On account of its feeble flight, it frequents the hills
or jungles, which is curious, since jackals abound in the jungles it
frequents. What damage might these jackals not do to birds that trail
from jungle to jungle, tails as long as a man's stretch (_qūlāch_)!
Hindūstānīs call the peacock _mor_. Its flesh is lawful food, according
to the doctrine of Imām Abū Ḥanīfa; it is like that of the partridge and
not unsavoury, but is eaten with instinctive aversion, in the way
camel-flesh is.
The parrot (H. _ṯūṯī_) is another. This also is in Bajaur and countries
lower down. It comes into Nīngnahār and the Lamghānāt in the heats when
mulberries ripen; it is not there at other times. It is of many, many
kinds. One sort is that which people carry into those (Tramontane)
countries. They [Sidenote: Fol. 278.] make it speak words.—Another sort
is smaller; this also they make speak words. They call it the
jungle-parrot. It is numerous in Bajaur, Sawād and that neighbourhood,
so much so that 5 or 6000 fly in one flock (_khail_). Between it and the
one first-named the difference is in bulk; in colouring they are just
one and the same.—Another sort is still smaller than the jungle-parrot.
Its head is quite red, the top of its wings (_i.e._ the primaries) is
red also; the tip of its tail for two hands'-thickness is
lustrous.[1769] The head of some parrots of this kind is iridescent
(_sūsanī_). It does not become a talker. People call it the Kashmīr
parrot.—Another sort is rather smaller than the jungle-parrot; its beak
is black; round its neck is a wide black collar; its primaries are red.
It is an excellent learner of words.—We used to think that whatever a
parrot or a _shārak_ (_mīna_) might say of words people had taught it,
it could not speak of any matter out of its own head. At this
juncture[1770] one of my immediate servants Abū'l-qāsim _Jalāīr_,
reported a singular thing to me. A parrot of this sort whose cage must
have been covered up, said, "Uncover my face; I am stifling." And
another time when palkī bearers sat down to take breath, this parrot,
presumably on hearing wayfarers pass by, said, "Men are going past, are
you not going on?" Let credit rest with the narrator,[1771] but
never-the-less, so long as a person has not heard with his own ears, he
may not believe!—Another kind is of a beautiful [Sidenote: Fol. 278b.]
full red; it has other colours also, but, as nothing is distinctly
remembered about them, no description is made. It is a very beautiful
bird, both in colour and form. People are understood to make this also
speak words.[1772] Its defect is a most unpleasant, sharp voice, like
the drawing of broken china on a copper plate.[1773]
The (P.) _shārak_[1774] is another. It is numerous in the Lamghānāt and
abounds lower down, all over Hindūstān. Like the parrot, it is of many
kinds.—The kind that is numerous in the Lamghānāt has a black head; its
primaries (_qānāt_) are spotted, its body rather larger and
thicker[1775] than that of the (T.) _chūghūr-chūq_.[1776] People teach
it to speak words.—Another kind they call _p:ndāwalī_[1777]; they bring
it from Bengal; it is black all over and of much greater bulk than the
_shārak_ (here, house-_mīna_). Its bill and foot are yellow and on each
ear are yellow wattles which hang down and have a bad appearance.[1778]
It learns to speak well and clearly.—Another kind of _shārak_ is
slenderer than the last and is red round the eyes. It does not learn to
speak. People call it the wood-_shārak_.[1779] Again, at the time when
(934 AH.) I had made a bridge over Gang (Ganges), crossed it, and put my
adversaries to flight, a kind of _shārak_ was seen, in the neighbourhood
of Laknau and Aūd (Oude), for the first time, which had a white breast,
piebald head, and black back. This kind does not learn to speak.[1780]
The _lūja_[1781] is another. This bird they call (Ar.) _bū-qalamūn_
(chameleon) because, between head and tail, it has five or six changing
colours, resplendent (_barrāq_) like a pigeon's throat. [Sidenote: Fol.
279.] It is about as large as the _kabg-i-darī_[1782] and seems to be
the _kabg-i-darī_ of Hindūstān. As the _kabg-i-darī_ moves (_yūrūr_) on
the heads (_kulah_) of mountains, so does this. It is in the Nijr-aū
mountains of the countries of Kābul, and in the mountains lower down but
it is not found higher up. People tell this wonderful thing about
it:—When the birds, at the onset of winter, descend to the hill-skirts,
if they come over a vineyard, they can fly no further and are taken. God
knows the truth! The flesh of this bird is very savoury.
The partridge (_durrāj_)[1783] is another. This is not peculiar to
Hindūstān but is also in the _Garm-sīr_ countries[1784]; as however some
kinds are only in Hindūstān, particulars of them are given here. The
_durrāj_ (_Francolinus vulgaris_) may be of the same bulk as the
_kīklīk_[1785]; the cock's back is the colour of the hen-pheasant
(_qīrghāwal-ning māda-sī_); its throat and breast are black, with quite
white spots.[1786] A red line comes down on both sides of both
eyes.[1787] It is named from its cry[1788] which is something like _Shir
dāram shakrak_.[1789] It pronounces _shir_ short; _dāram shakrak_ it
says distinctly. Astarābād partridges are said to cry _Bāt mīnī tūtīlār_
(Quick! they have caught me). The partridge of Arabia and those parts is
understood to cry, _Bi'l_ _shakar tadawm al ni`am_ (with sugar pleasure
endures)! The hen-bird has the colour of the young pheasant. These birds
are found below Nijr-aū.—Another kind is called _kanjāl_. Its bulk may
be that of the one already described. Its voice is very like that of the
_kīklīk_ but much shriller. There is little [Sidenote: Fol. 279b.]
difference in colour between the cock and hen. It is found in
Parashāwar, Hashnagar and countries lower down, but not higher up.
The _p(h)ūl-paikār_[1790] is another. Its size may be that of the
_kabg-i-darī_; its shape is that of the house-cock, its colour that of
the hen. From forehead (_tūmāgh_) to throat it is of a beautiful colour,
quite red. It is in the Hindūstān mountains.
The wild-fowl (_ṣaḥrāī-tāūgh_)[1791] is another. It flies like a
pheasant, and is not of all colours as house-fowl are. It is in the
mountains of Bajaur and lower down, but not higher up.
The _chīlsī_ (or _jīlsī_)[1792] is another. In bulk it equals the
_p(h)ūl-paikār_ but the latter has the finer colouring. It is in the
mountains of Bajaur.
The _shām_[1793] is another. It is about as large as a house-fowl; its
colour is unique (_ghair mukarrar_).[1794] It also is in the mountains
of Bajaur.
The quail (P. _būdana_) is another. It is not peculiar to Hindūstān but
four or five kinds are so.—One is that which goes to our countries
(Tramontana), larger and more spreading than the (Hindūstān)
quail.[1795]—Another kind[1796] is smaller than the one first named. Its
primaries and tail are reddish. It flies in flocks like the _chīr_
(_Phasianus Wallichii_).—Another kind is smaller than that which goes to
our countries and is darker on throat [Sidenote: Fol. 280.] and
breast.[1797]—Another kind goes in small numbers to Kābul; it is very
small, perhaps a little larger than the yellow wag-tail
(_qārcha_)[1798]; they call it _qūrātū_ in Kābul.
The Indian bustard (P. _kharchāl_)[1799] is another. It is about as
large as the (T.) _tūghdāq_ (_Otis tarda_, the great bustard), and seems
to be the _tūghdāq_ of Hindūstān.[1800] Its flesh is delicious; of some
birds the leg is good, of others, the wing; of the bustard all the meat
is delicious and excellent.
The florican (P. _charz_)[1801] is another. It is rather less than the
_tūghdīrī_ (_houbara_)[1802]; the cock's back is like the _tūghdīrī's_,
and its breast is black. The hen is of one colour.
The Hindūstān sand-grouse (T. _bāghrī-qarā_)[1803] is another. It is
smaller and slenderer than the _bāghrī-qarā_ [_Pterocles arenarius_] of
those countries (Tramontana). Also its cry is sharper.
Of the birds that frequent water and the banks of rivers, one is the
_dīng_,[1804] an animal of great bulk, each wing measuring a _qūlāch_
(fathom). It has no plumage (_tūqī_) on head or neck; a thing like a bag
hangs from its neck; its back is black; its breast is white. It goes
sometimes to Kābul; one year people brought one they had caught. It
became very tame; if meat were thrown to it, it never failed to catch
it in its bill. Once it swallowed a six-nailed shoe, another time a
whole fowl, wings [Sidenote: Fol. 280b.] and feathers, all right down.
The _sāras_ (_Grus antigone_) is another. Turks in Hindūstān call it
_tīwa-tūrnā_ (camel-crane). It may be smaller than the _dīng_ but its
neck is rather longer. Its head is quite red.[1805] People keep this
bird at their houses; it becomes very tame.
The _mānek_[1806] is another. In stature it approaches the _sāras_, but
its bulk is less. It resembles the _lag-lag_ (_Ciconia alba_, the white
stork) but is much larger; its bill is larger and is black. Its head is
iridescent, its neck white, its wings partly-coloured; the tips and
border-feathers and under parts of the wings are white, their middle
black.
Another stork (_lag-lag_) has a white neck and all other parts black. It
goes to those countries (Tramontana). It is rather smaller than the
_lag-lag_ (_Ciconia alba_). A Hindūstānī calls it _yak-rang_ (one
colour?).
Another stork in colour and shape is exactly like the storks that go to
those countries. Its bill is blacker and its bulk much less than the
_lag-lag_'s (_Ciconia alba_).[1807]
Another bird resembles the grey heron (_aūqār_) and the _lag-lag_; but
its bill is longer than the heron's and its body smaller than the white
stork's (_lag-lag_).
Another is the large _buzak_[1808] (black ibis). In bulk it may equal
the buzzard (Turkī, _sār_). The back of its wings is white. It has a
loud cry.
The white _buzak_[1809] is another. Its head and bill are black.
[Sidenote: Fol. 281.] It is much larger than the one that goes to those
countries,[1810] but smaller than the Hindūstān _buzak_.[1811]
The _gharm-pāī_[1812] (spotted-billed duck) is another. It is larger
than the _sūna būrchīn_[1813] (mallard). The drake and duck are of one
colour. It is in Hashnagar at all seasons, sometimes it goes into the
Lamghānāt. Its flesh is very savoury.
The _shāh-murgh_ (_Sarcidiornis melanonotus_, comb duck or _nukta_) is
another. It may be a little smaller than a goose. It has a swelling on
its bill; its back is black; its flesh is excellent eating.
The _zummaj_ is another. It is about as large as the _būrgūt_ (_Aquila
chrysaetus_, the golden eagle).
The (T.) _ālā-qārgha_ of Hindūstān is another (_Corvus cornix_, the pied
crow). This is slenderer and smaller than the _ālā-qārgha_ of those
countries (Tramontana). Its neck is partly white.
Another Hindūstān bird resembles the crow (T. _qārcha_, _C. splendens_)
and the magpie (Ar. _`aqqa_). In the Lamghānāt people call it the
jungle-bird (P. _murgh-i-jangal_).[1814] Its head and breast are black;
its wings and tail reddish; its eye quite red. Having a feeble flight,
it does not come out of the jungle, whence its name.
The great bat (P. _shapara_)[1815] is another. People call it (Hindī)
_chumgādur_. It is about as large as the owl (T. _yāpālāq_, _Otus
brachyotus_), and has a head like a puppy's. When it is thinking of
lodging for the night on a tree, it takes hold of a branch, turns
head-downwards, and so remains. It has much singularity.
The magpie (Ar. _`aqqa_) is another. People call it (H.?) _matā_
(_Dendrocitta rufa_, the Indian tree-pie). It may be somewhat less than
the _`aqqa_ (_Pica rustica_), which moreover is pied black and white,
while the _matā_ is pied brown and black.[1816]
Another is a small bird, perhaps of the size of the (T.)
_sāndūlāch_.[1817] [Sidenote: Fol. 281b.] It is of a beautiful red with
a little black on its wings.
The _karcha_[1818] is another; it is after the fashion of a swallow (T.
_qārlūghāch_), but much larger and quite black.
The _kūīl_[1819] (_Eudynamys orientalis_, the koel) is another. It may
be as large as the crow (P. _zāg_) but is much slenderer. It has a kind
of song and is understood to be the bulbul of Hindūstān. Its honour with
Hindūstānīs is as great as is the bulbul's. It always stays in
closely-wooded gardens.
Another bird is after the fashion of the (Ar.) _shiqarrāk_ (_Cissa
chinensis_, the green-magpie). It clings to trees, is perhaps as large
as the green-magpie, and is parrot-green (_Gecinus striolatus_, the
little green-woodpecker?).
(_k. Fauna of Hindūstān:—Aquatic animals._)
One is the water-tiger (P. _shīr-ābī_, _Crocodilus palustris_).[1820]
This is in the standing-waters. It is like a lizard (T. _gīlās_).[1821]
People say it carries off men and even buffaloes.
The (P.) _siyāh-sār_ (black-head) is another. This also is like a
lizard. It is in all rivers of Hindūstān. One that was taken and brought
in was about 4-5 _qārī_ (_cir._ 13 feet) long and as thick perhaps as a
sheep. It is said to grow still larger. Its snout is over half a yard
long. It has rows of small teeth in its upper and lower jaws. It comes
out of the water and sinks into the mud (_bātā_).
The (Sans.) _g[h]aṛīāl_ (_Gavialus gangeticus_) is another.[1822] It is
said to grow large; many in the army saw it in the Sarū (Gogra) river.
It is said to take people; while we were on that river's banks (934-935
A.H.), it took one or two slave-women (_dādūk_), and it took three or
four camp-followers between Ghāzīpūr and Banāras. In that neighbourhood
I saw one but from a distance only and not quite clearly.
The water-hog (P. _khūk-ābī_, _Platanista gangetica_, the porpoise) is
another. This also is in all Hindūstān rivers. It comes up suddenly out
of the water; its head appears and disappears; it [Sidenote: Fol. 282.]
dives again and stays below, shewing its tail. Its snout is as long as
the _siyāh-sār's_ and it has the same rows of small teeth. Its head and
the rest of its body are fish-like. When at play in the water, it looks
like a water-carrier's bag (_mashak_). Water-hogs, playing in the Sarū,
leap right out of the water; like fish, they never leave it.
Again there is the _kalah_ (or _galah_)-fish [_bāligh_].[1823] Two bones
each about 3 inches (_aīlīk_) long, come out in a line with its ears;
these it shakes when taken, producing an extraordinary noise, whence,
seemingly, people have called it _kalah_ [or _galah_].
The flesh of Hindūstān fishes is very savoury; they have no odour
(_aīd_) or tiresomeness.[1824] They are surprisingly active. On one
occasion when people coming, had flung a net across a stream, leaving
its two edges half a yard above the water, most fish passed by leaping a
yard above it. In many rivers are little fish which fling themselves a
yard or more out of the water if there be harsh [Sidenote: Fol. 282b.]
noise or sound of feet.
The frogs of Hindūstān, though otherwise like those others (Tramontane),
run 6 or 7 yards on the face of the water.[1825]
(_l. Vegetable products of Hindūstān: Fruits._)
The mango (P. _anbah_) is one of the fruits peculiar to Hindūstān.
Hindūstānīs pronounce the _b_ in its name as though no vowel followed it
(_i.e._ Sans. _anb_);[1826] this being awkward to utter, some people
call the fruit [P.] _naghzak_[1827] as Khwāja Khusrau does:—
_Naghzak-i mā_ [var. _khẉash_] _naghz-kun-i būstān,
Naghztarīn mewa_ [var. _na`mat_]_-i-Hindūstān_.[1828]
Mangoes when good, are very good, but, many as are eaten, few are
first-rate. They are usually plucked unripe and ripened in the house.
Unripe, they make excellent condiments (_qātīq_), are good also
preserved in syrup.[1829] Taking it altogether, the mango is the best
fruit of Hindūstān. Some so praise it as to give it preference over all
fruits except the musk-melon (T. _qāwūn_), but such praise outmatches
it. It resembles the _kārdī_ peach.[1830] It ripens in the rains. It is
eaten in two ways: one is to squeeze it to a pulp, make a hole in it,
and suck out the juice,—the other, to peel and eat it like the _kārdī_
peach. Its tree grows very large[1831] and has a leaf somewhat
resembling the peach-tree's. The trunk is ill-looking and ill-shaped,
but in Bengāl and Gujrāt is heard of as growing handsome (_khūb_).[1832]
The plantain (Sans. _kelā_, _Musa sapientum_) is another.[1833] An
[Sidenote: Fol. 283.] `Arab calls it _mauz_.[1834] Its tree is not very
tall, indeed is not to be called a tree, since it is something between a
grass and a tree. Its leaf is a little like that of the
_amān-qarā_[1835] but grows about 2 yards (_qārī_) long and nearly
one broad. Out of the middle of its leaves rises, heart-like, a bud
which resembles a sheep's heart. As each leaf (petal) of this bud
expands, there grows at its base a row of 6 or 7 flowers which become
the plantains. These flowers become visible with the lengthening of the
heart-like shoot and the opening of the petals of the bud. The tree is
understood to flower once only.[1836] The fruit has two pleasant
qualities, one that it peels easily, the other that it has neither stone
nor fibre.[1837] It is rather longer and thinner than the egg-plant (P.
_bādanjān_; _Solanum melongena_). It is not very sweet; the Bengāl
plantain (_i.e._ _chīnī-champa_) is, however, said to be very sweet.
The plantain is a very good-looking tree, its broad, broad, leaves of
beautiful green having an excellent appearance.
The _anblī_ (H. _imlī_, _Tamarindus indica_, the tamarind) is another.
By this name (_anblī_) people call the _khurmā-i-hind_ (Indian
date-tree).[1838] It has finely-cut leaves (leaflets), precisely like
those of the (T.) _būīā_, except that they are not so finely-cut.[1839]
It is a very good-looking tree, giving dense shade. It grows wild in
masses too.
The (Beng.) _mahuwā_ (_Bassia latifolia_) is another.[1840] People call
it also (P.) _gul-chikān_ (or _chigān_, distilling-flower). This also is
a very large tree. Most of the wood in the houses of Hindūstānīs
[Sidenote: Fol. 283b.] is from it. Spirit (_`araq_) is distilled from
its flowers,[1841] not only so, but they are dried and eaten like
raisins, and from them thus dried, spirit is also extracted. The dried
flowers taste just like _kishmish_;[1842] they have an ill-flavour. The
flowers are not bad in their natural state[1843]; they are eatable. The
_mahuwā_ grows wild also. Its fruit is tasteless, has rather a large
seed with a thin husk, and from this seed, again,[1844] oil is
extracted.
The mimusops (Sans. _khirnī_, _Mimusops kauki_) is another. Its tree,
though not very large, is not small. The fruit is yellow and thinner
than the red jujube (T. _chīkdā_, _Elæagnus angustifolia_). It has just
the grape's flavour, but a rather bad after-taste; it is not bad,
however, and is eatable. The husk of its stone is thin.
The (Sans.) _jāman_ (_Eugenia jambolana_)[1845] is another. Its leaf,
except for being thicker and greener, is quite like the willow's (T.
_tāl_). The tree does not want for beauty. Its fruit is like a black
grape, is sourish, and not very good.
The (H.) _kamrak_ (Beng. _kamrunga_, _Averrhoa carambola_) is another.
Its fruit is five-sided, about as large as the _`ain-ālū_[1846] and some
3 inches long. It ripens to yellow; gathered unripe, it is very bitter;
gathered ripe, its bitterness has become sub-acid, not bad, not wanting
in pleasantness.[1847]
The jack-fruit (H. _kadhil_, B. _kanthal_, _Artocarpus integrifolia_) is
another.[1848] This is a fruit of singular form and flavour; it looks
[Sidenote: Fol. 284.] like a sheep's stomach stuffed and made into a
haggis (_gīpa_);[1849] and it is sickeningly-sweet. Inside it are
filbert-like stones[1850] which, on the whole, resemble dates, but are
round, not long, and have softer substance; these are eaten. The
jack-fruit is very adhesive; for this reason people are said to oil
mouth and hands before eating of it. It is heard of also as growing, not
only on the branches of its tree, but on trunk and root too.[1851] One
would say that the tree was all hung round with haggises.[1852]
The monkey-jack (H. _badhal_, B. _burhul_, _Artocarpus lacoocha_) is
another. The fruit may be of the size of a quince (var. apple). Its
smell is not bad.[1853] Unripe it is a singularly tasteless and
empty[1854] thing; when ripe, it is not so bad. It ripens soft, can be
pulled to pieces and eaten anywhere, tastes very much like a rotten
quince, and has an excellent little austere flavour.
The lote-fruit (Sans. _ber_, _Zizyphus jujuba_) is another. Its Persian
name is understood to be _kanār_.[1855] It is of several kinds: of one
the fruit is larger than the plum (_ālūcha_)[1856]; another is shaped
like the Ḥusainī grape. Most of them are not very good; we saw one in
Bāndīr (Gūālīār) that was really good. The lote-tree sheds its leaves
under the Signs _S̤aur_ and _Jauzā_ (Bull and Twins), burgeons under
_Saraṯān_ and _Asad_ (Crab and Lion) which are the true
rainy-season,—then becoming fresh and green, and it ripens its fruit
under _Dalū_ and _Ḥaut_ (Bucket _i.e._ Aquarius, and Fish).
The (Sans.) _karaūndā_ (_Carissa carandas_, the corinda) is another. It
grows in bushes after the fashion of the (T.) _chīka_ of our
country.[1857] but the _chīka_ grows on mountains, the _karaūndā_ on the
[Sidenote: Fol. 284b.] plains. In flavour it is like the rhubarb
itself,[1858] but is sweeter and less juicy.
The (Sans.) _pānīyālā_ (_Flacourtia cataphracta_)[1859] is another. It
is larger than the plum (_ālūcha_) and like the red-apple unripe.[1860]
It is a little austere and is good. The tree is taller than the
pomegranate's; its leaf is like that of the almond-tree but smaller.
The (H.) _gūlar_ (_Ficus glomerata_, the clustered fig)[1861] is
another. The fruit grows out of the tree-trunk, resembles the fig (P.
_anjīr_), but is singularly tasteless.
The (Sans.) _āmlā_ (_Phyllanthus emblica_, the myrobalan-tree) is
another. This also is a five-sided fruit.[1862] It looks like the
unblown cotton-pod. It is an astringent and ill-flavoured thing, but
confiture made of it is not bad. It is a wholesome fruit. Its tree is of
excellent form and has very minute leaves.
The (H.) _chirūnjī_ (_Buchanania latifolia_)[1863] is another. This tree
had been understood to grow in the hills, but I knew later about it,
because there were three or four clumps of it in our gardens. It is much
like the _mahuwā_. Its kernel is not bad, a thing between the walnut and
the almond, not bad! rather smaller than the pistachio and round; people
put it in custards (P. _pālūda_) and sweetmeats (Ar. _ḥalwa_).
The date-palm (P. _khurmā_, _Phœnix dactylifera_) is another. This is
not peculiar to Hindūstān, but is here described because it is not in
those countries (Tramontana). It grows in Lamghān also.[1864] Its
branches (_i.e._ leaves) grow from just one place at its top; its leaves
(_i.e._ leaflets) grow on both sides of the branches (midribs) from neck
(_būīn_) to tip; its trunk is rough and ill-coloured; [Sidenote: Fol.
285.] its fruit is like a bunch of grapes, but much larger. People say
that the date-palm amongst vegetables resembles an animal in two
respects: one is that, as, if an animal's head be cut off, its life is
taken, so it is with the date-palm, if its head is cut off, it dries
off; the other is that, as the offspring of animals is not produced
without the male, so too with the date-palm, it gives no good fruit
unless a branch of the male-tree be brought into touch with the
female-tree. The truth of this last matter is not known (to me). The
above-mentioned head of the date-palm is called its cheese. The tree so
grows that where its leaves come out is cheese-white, the leaves
becoming green as they lengthen. This white part, the so-called cheese,
is tolerable eating, not bad, much like the walnut. People make a wound
in the cheese, and into this wound insert a leaf(let), in such a way
that all liquid flowing from the wound runs down it.[1865] The tip of
the leaflet is set over the mouth of a pot suspended to the tree in such
a way that it collects whatever liquor is yielded by the wound. This
liquor is rather pleasant if drunk at once; if drunk after two or three
days, people say it is quite exhilarating (_kaifīyat_). Once when I had
gone to visit Bārī,[1866] and made an [Sidenote: Fol. 285b.] excursion
to the villages on the bank of the Chaṃbal-river, we met in with people
collecting this date-liquor in the valley-bottom. A good deal was drunk;
no hilarity was felt; much must be drunk, seemingly, to produce a little
cheer.
The coco-nut palm (P. _nārgīl_, _Cocos nucifera_) is another. An `Arab
gives it Arabic form[1867] and says _nārjīl_; Hindūstān people say
_nālīr_, seemingly by popular error.[1868] Its fruit is the Hindī-nut
from which black spoons (_qarā qāshūq_) are made and the larger ones of
which serve for guitar-bodies. The coco-palm has general resemblance to
the date-palm, but has more, and more glistening leaves. Like the
walnut, the coco-nut has a green outer husk; but its husk is of fibre on
fibre. All ropes for ships and boats and also cord for sewing boat-seams
are heard of as made from these husks. The nut, when stripped of its
husk, near one end shews a triangle of hollows, two of which are solid,
the third a nothing (_būsh_), easily pierced. Before the kernel forms,
there is fluid inside; people pierce the soft hollow and drink this; it
tastes like date-palm cheese in solution, and is not bad.
The (Sans.) _tāṛ_ (_Borassus flabelliformis_, the Palmyra-palm) is
another. Its branches (_i.e._ leaves) also are quite at its top. Just as
[Sidenote: Fol. 286.] with the date-palm, people hang a pot on it, take
its juice and drink it. They call this liquor _tāṛī_;[1869] it is said
to be more exhilarating than date liquor. For about a yard along its
branches (_i.e._ leaf-stems)[1870] there are no leaves; above this, at
the tip of the branch (stem), 30 or 40 open out like the spread palm of
the hand, all from one place. These leaves approach a yard in length.
People often write Hindī characters on them after the fashion of account
rolls (_daftar yūsūnlūq_).
The orange (Ar. _nāranj_, _Citrus aurantium_) and orange-like fruits are
others of Hindūstān.[1871] Oranges grow well in the Lamghānāt, Bajaur
and Sawād. The Lamghānāt one is smallish, has a navel,[1872] is very
agreeable, fragile and juicy. It is not at all like the orange of
Khurāsān and those parts, being so fragile that many spoil before
reaching Kābul from the Lamghānāt which may be 13-14 _yīghāch_ (65-70
miles), while the Astarābād orange, by reason of its thick skin and
scant juice, carries with [Sidenote: Fol. 286b.] less damage from there
to Samarkand, some 270-280 _yīghāch_.[1873] The Bajaur orange is about
as large as a quince, very juicy and more acid than other oranges.
Khwāja Kalān once said to me, "We counted the oranges gathered from a
single tree of this sort in Bajaur and it mounted up to 7,000." It had
been always in my mind that the word _nāranj_ was an Arabic form;[1874]
it would seem to be really so, since every-one in Bajaur and Sawād says
(P.) _nārang_.[1875]
The lime (B. _līmū_, _C. acida_) is another. It is very plentiful, about
the size of a hen's egg, and of the same shape. If a person poisoned
drink the water in which its fibres have been boiled, danger is
averted.[1876]
The citron (P. _turunj_,[1877] _C. medica_) is another of the fruits
resembling the orange. Bajaurīs and Sawādīs call it _bālang_ and hence
give the name _bālang-marabbā_ to its marmalade (_marabbā_) confiture.
In Hindūstān people call the _turunj bajaurī_.[1878] There are two kinds
of _turunj_: one is sweet, flavourless and nauseating, of no use for
eating but with peel that may be good for marmalade; it has the same
sickening sweetness as the Lamghānāt _turunj_; the other, that of
Hindūstān and Bajaur, is acid, quite deliciously acid, and makes
excellent sherbet, well-flavoured, and wholesome drinking. Its size may
be that of the Khusrawī melon; it has a thick skin, wrinkled and uneven,
with one end thinner and beaked. It is of a deeper yellow than the
orange (_nāranj_). Its tree has no trunk, is rather low, grows in
bushes, and has a larger [Sidenote: Fol. 287.] leaf than the orange.
The _sangtāra_[1879] is another fruit resembling the orange (_nāranj_).
It is like the citron (_turunj_) in colour and form, but has both ends
of its skin level;[1880] also it is not rough and is somewhat the
smaller fruit. Its tree is large, as large as the apricot (_aūrūq_),
with a leaf like the orange's. It is a deliciously acid fruit, making a
very pleasant and wholesome sherbet. Like the lime it is a powerful
stomachic, but not weakening like the orange (_nāranj_).
The large lime which they call (H.) _gal-gal_[1881] in Hindūstān is
another fruit resembling the orange. It has the shape of a goose's egg,
but unlike that egg, does not taper to the ends. Its skin is smooth like
the _sangtāra's_; it is remarkably juicy.
The (H.) _jānbīrī_ lime[1882] is another orange-like fruit. It is
orange-shaped and, though yellow, not orange-yellow. It smells like the
citron (_turunj_); it too is deliciously acid.
The (Sans.) _sadā-fal_ (_phal_)[1883] is another orange-like fruit. This
is pear-shaped, colours like the quince, ripens sweet, but not to the
sickly-sweetness of the orange (_nāranj_).
The _amrd-fal_ (sic. Ḥai. MS.—Sans. _amrit-phal_)[1884] is another
orange-like fruit.
The lemon (H. _karnā_, _C. limonum_) is another fruit resembling the
orange (_nāranj_); it may be as large as the _gal-gal_ and is also acid.
The (Sans.) _amal-bīd_[1885] is another fruit resembling the orange.
After three years (in Hindūstān), it was first seen to-day.[1886] They
say a needle melts away if put inside it,[1887] either from its acidity
[Sidenote: Fol. 287b.] or some other property. It is as acid, perhaps,
as the citron and lemon (_turunj_ and _līmū_).[1888]
(_m. Vegetable products of Hindūstān:—Flowers._)
In Hindūstān there is great variety of flowers. One is the (D.) _jāsūn_
(_Hibiscus rosa sinensis_), which some Hindūstānīs call (Hindī)
_gaẕhal_.[1889] *It is not a grass (_giyāh_); its tree (is in stems like
the bush of the red-rose; it) is rather taller than the bush of the
red-rose.[1890]* The flower of the _jāsūn_ is fuller in colour than that
of the pomegranate, and may be of the size of the red-rose, but, the
red-rose, when its bud has grown, opens simply, whereas, when the
_jāsūn_-bud opens, a stem on which other petals grow, is seen like a
heart amongst its expanded petals. Though the two are parts of the one
flower, yet the outcome of the lengthening and thinning of that
stem-like heart of the first-opened petals gives the semblance of two
flowers.[1891] It is not a common matter. The beautifully coloured
flowers look very well on the tree, but they do not last long; they
fade in just one day. The _jāsūn_ blossoms very well through the four
months of the rains; it seems indeed to flower all through the year;
with this profusion, however, it gives no perfume.
The (H.) _kanīr_ (_Nerium odorum_, the oleander)[1892] is another. It
grows both red and white. Like the peach-flower, it is five petalled. It
is like the peach-bloom (in colour?), but opens 14 or 15 flowers from
one place, so that seen from a distance, they look like one great
flower. The oleander-bush is taller than the rose-bush. The red oleander
has a sort of scent, faint and agreeable. (Like the _jāsūn_,) it also
blooms well and profusely in the [Sidenote: Fol. 288.] rains, and it
also is had through most of the year.
The (H.) (_kīūrā_) (_Pandanus odoratissimus_, the screw-pine) is
another.[1893] It has a very agreeable perfume.[1894] Musk has the
defect of being dry; this may be called moist musk—a very agreeable
perfume. The tree's singular appearance notwithstanding, it has flowers
perhaps 1-1/2 to 2 _qārīsh_ (13-1/2 to 18 inches) long. It has long
leaves having the character of the reed (P.) _gharau_[1895] and having
spines. Of these leaves, while pressed together bud-like, the outer ones
are the greener and more spiny; the inner ones are soft and white. In
amongst these inner leaves grow things like what belongs to the middle
of a flower, and from these things comes the excellent perfume. When the
tree first comes up not yet shewing any trunk, it is like the bush
(_būta_) of the male-reed,[1896] but with wider and more spiny leaves.
What serves it for a trunk is very shapeless, its roots remaining shewn.
The (P.) _yāsman_ (jasmine) is another; the white they call (B.)
_champa_.[1897] It is larger and more strongly scented than our
_yāsman_-flower.
(_n. Seasons of the year._)
Again:—whereas there are four seasons in those countries,[1898] there
are three in Hindūstān, namely, four months are summer; four are the
rains; four are winter. The beginning of their months is from the
welcome of the crescent-moons.[1899] Every three years they add a month
to the year; if one had been added to the rainy season, the next is
added, three years later, to the winter months, the next, in the same
way, to the hot months. This is their mode of intercalation.[1900]
(_Chait_, _Baisākh_, _Jeṭh_ and [Sidenote: Fol. 288b.] _Asāṛh_) are the
hot months, corresponding with the Fish, (Ram, Bull and Twins; _Sāwan_,
_Bhādoṅ_, _Kū,ār_ and _Kātik_) are the rainy months, corresponding with
the Crab, (Lion, Virgin and Balance; _Aghan_, _Pūs_, _Māgh_ and
_Phālgun_) are the cold months, corresponding with the Scorpion,
(Archer, Capricorn, and Bucket or Aquarius).
The people of Hind, having thus divided the year into three seasons of
four months each, divide each of those seasons by taking from each, the
two months of the force of the heat, rain,[1901] and cold. Of the hot
months the last two, _i.e. Jeṭh_ and _Asāṛh_ are the force of the heat;
of the rainy months, the first two, _i.e. Sāwan_ and _Bhādoṅ_ are the
force of the rains; of the cold season, the middle two, _i.e. Pūs_ and
_Māgh_ are the force of the cold. By this classification there are six
seasons in Hindūstān.
(_o. Days of the week._)
To the days also they have given names:—[1902] (_Sanīchar_ is Saturday;
_Rabī-bār_ is Sunday; _Som-wār_ is Monday; _Mangal-wār_ is Tuesday;
_Budh-bār_ is Wednesday; _Brihaspat-bār_ is Thursday; _Shukr-bār_ is
Friday).
(_p. Divisions of time._)
[Sidenote: Fol. 289.] (_Author's note on the daqīqa._) The
_daqīqa_ is about as long as six repetitions of the _Fātiḥa_
with the _Bismillāh_, so that a day-and-night is as long as
8640 repetitions of the _Fātiḥa_ with the _Bismillāh._
As in our countries what is known by the (Turkī) term _kīcha-gūndūz_ (a
day-and-night, nycthemeron) is divided into 24 parts, each called an
hour (Ar. _sā`at_), and the hour is divided into 60 parts, each called a
minute (Ar. _daqīqa_), so that a day-and-night consists of 1440
minutes,—so the people of Hind divide the night-and-day into 60 parts,
each called a (S.) _g'harī_.[1903] They also divide the night into four
and the day into four, calling each part a (S.) _pahr_ (watch) which in
Persian is a _pās_. A watch and watchman (_pās u pāsbān_) had been heard
about (by us) in those countries (Transoxania), but without these
particulars. Agreeing with the division into watches, a body of
_g'harīālīs_[1904] is chosen and appointed in all considerable towns of
Hindūstān. They cast a broad brass (plate-) thing,[1905] perhaps as
large as a tray (_ṯabaq_) and about two hands'-thickness; this they call
a _g'harīāl_ and hang up in a high place (_bīr buland yīr-dā_). Also
they have a vessel perforated at the bottom like an hour-cup[1906] and
filling in one _g'harī_ (_i.e._ 24 minutes). The _g'harīālīs_ put this
into water and wait till it fills. For example, they will put the
perforated [Sidenote: Fol. 289b.] cup into water at day-birth; when it
fills the first time, they strike the gong once with their mallets; when
a second time, twice, and so on till the end of the watch. They announce
the end of a watch by several rapid blows of their mallets. After these
they pause; then strike once more, if the first day-watch has ended,
twice if the second, three times if the third, and four times if the
fourth. After the fourth day-watch, when the night-watches begin, these
are gone through in the same way. It used to be the rule to beat the
sign of a watch only when the watch ended; so that sleepers chancing to
wake in the night and hear the sound of a third or fourth _g'harī_,
would not know whether it was of the second or third night-watch. I
therefore ordered that at night or on a cloudy day the sign of the watch
should be struck after that of the _g'harī_, for example, that after
striking the third _g'harī_ of the first night-watch, the _g'harīālīs_
were to pause and then strike the sign of the watch, in order to make it
known that this third _g'harī_ was of the first night-watch,—and that
after striking four _g'harīs_ of the third night-watch, they should
pause and then strike the sign of the third watch, in order to make it
known that this fourth _g'harī_ was of the third night-watch. It did
very well; anyone happening to wake in the night and hear the gong,
would know what _g'harī_ of what watch of night it was.
Again, they divide the _g'harī_ into 60 parts, each part being called a
_pal_;[1907] by this each night-and-day will consist of 3,500 _pals_.
[Sidenote: Fol. 290.]
(_Author's note on the pal._) They say the length of a _pal_
is the shutting and opening of the eyelids 60 times, which in
a night-and-day would be 216,000 shuttings and openings of the
eyes. Experiment shews that a _pal_ is about equal to 8
repetitions of the _Qul-huwa-allāh_[1908] and _Bismillāh_;
this would be 28,000 repetitions in a night-and-day.
(_q. Measures._)
The people of Hind have also well-arranged measures:—[1909] 8 _ratīs_ =
1 _māsha_; 4 _māsha_ = 1 _tānk_ = 32 _ratīs_; 5 _māsha_ = 1 _miṣqāl_ =
40 _ratīs_; 12 _māsha_ = 1 _tūla_ = 96 _ratīs_; 14 _tūla_ = 1 _ser_.
This is everywhere fixed:—40 _ser_ = 1 _mānbān_; 12 _mānbān_ = 1
_mānī_; 100 _mānī_ they call a _mīnāsa_.[1910]
Pearls and jewels they weigh by the _tānk_.
(_r. Modes of reckoning._)
The people of Hind have also an excellent mode of reckoning: 100,000
they call a _lak_; 100 _laks_, a _krūr_; 100 _krūrs_, an _arb_; 100
_arbs_, 1 _karb_; 100 _karb's_, 1 _nīl_; 100 _nīls_, 1 _padam_; 100
_padams_, 1 _sāng_. The fixing of such high reckonings as these is proof
of the great amount of wealth in Hindūstān.
(_s. Hindū inhabitants of Hindūstān._)
Most of the inhabitants of Hindūstān are pagans; they call a pagan a
Hindū. Most Hindūs believe in the transmigration of souls. All artisans,
wage-earners, and officials are Hindūs. In our countries dwellers in the
wilds (_i.e._ nomads) get tribal names; [Sidenote: Fol. 290b.] here the
settled people of the cultivated lands and villages get tribal
names.[1911] Again:—every artisan there is follows the trade that has
come down to him from forefather to forefather.
(_t. Defects of Hindūstān._)
Hindūstān is a country of few charms. Its people have no good looks; of
social intercourse, paying and receiving visits there is none; of genius
and capacity none; of manners none; in handicraft and work there is no
form or symmetry, method or quality; there are no good horses, no good
dogs, no grapes, musk-melons or first-rate fruits, no ice or cold water,
no good bread or cooked food in the _bāzārs_, no Hot-baths, no Colleges,
no candles, torches or candlesticks.
In place of candle and torch they have a great dirty gang they call
lamp-men (_diwatī_), who in the left hand hold a smallish wooden tripod
to one corner of which a thing like the top of a candlestick is fixed,
having a wick in it about as thick as the thumb. In the right hand they
hold a gourd, through a narrow slit made in which, oil is let trickle in
a thin thread when the wick needs it. Great people keep a hundred or two
of these lamp-men. This is the Hindūstān substitute for lamps and
candlesticks! If their rulers and begs have work at night needing
candles, these dirty lamp-men bring these lamps, go close up and
[Sidenote: Fol. 291.] there stand.
Except their large rivers and their standing-waters which flow in
ravines or hollows (there are no waters). There are no running-waters in
their gardens or residences (_`imāratlār_).[1912] These residences have
no charm, air (_hawā_), regularity or symmetry.
Peasants and people of low standing go about naked. They tie on a thing
called _lungūtā_,[1913] a decency-clout which hangs two spans below the
navel. From the tie of this pendant decency-clout, another clout is
passed between the thighs and made fast behind. Women also tie on a
cloth (_lung_), one-half of which goes round the waist, the other is
thrown over the head.
(_u. Advantages of Hindūstān._)
Pleasant things of Hindūstān are that it is a large country and has
masses of gold and silver. Its air in the Rains is very fine. Sometimes
it rains 10, 15 or 20 times a day; torrents pour down all at once and
rivers flow where no water had been. While it rains and through the
Rains, the air is remarkably fine, not to be surpassed for healthiness
and charm. The fault is that the air becomes very soft and damp. A bow
of those (Transoxanian) countries after going through the Rains in
Hindūstān, may not be drawn even; it is ruined; not only the bow,
everything is [Sidenote: Fol. 291b.] affected, armour, book, cloth, and
utensils all; a house even does not last long. Not only in the Rains
but also in the cold and the hot seasons, the airs are excellent; at
these times, however, the north-west wind constantly gets up laden with
dust and earth. It gets up in great strength every year in the heats,
under the Bull and Twins when the Rains are near; so strong and carrying
so much dust and earth that there is no seeing one another. People call
this wind Darkener of the Sky (H. _āndhī_). The weather is hot under the
Bull and Twins, but not intolerably so, not so hot as in Balkh and
Qandahār and not for half so long.
Another good thing in Hindūstān is that it has unnumbered and endless
workmen of every kind. There is a fixed caste (_jam`ī_) for every sort
of work and for every thing, which has done that work or that thing from
father to son till now. Mullā Sharaf, writing in the _Z̤afar-nāma_ about
the building of Tīmūr Beg's Stone Mosque, lays stress on the fact that
on it 200 stone-cutters worked, from Āẕarbāījān, Fars, Hindūstān and
other countries. But 680 men worked daily on my buildings in Āgra and of
Āgra stone-cutters only; while 1491 stone-cutters worked daily on my
buildings in Āgra, Sīkrī, Bīāna, Dūlpūr, Gūālīār and Kūīl. In [Sidenote:
Fol. 292.] the same way there are numberless artisans and workmen of
every sort in Hindūstān.
(_v. Revenues of Hindūstān._)
The revenue of the countries now held by me (935 AH.-1528 AD.) from
Bhīra to Bihār is 52 _krūrs_,[1914] as will be known in detail from the
following summary.[1915] Eight or nine _krūrs_ of this are from
parganas of rāīs and rājas who, as obedient from of old, receive
allowance and maintenance.
REVENUES OF HINDŪSTĀN FROM WHAT HAS SO FAR COME UNDER THE VICTORIOUS
STANDARDS
--------------------------------+---------+-----+----------
Sarkārs. | Krūrs. |Laks.| Tankas.
--------------------------------+---------+-----+----------
Trans-sutluj:--Bhīra, | | |
Lāhūr, Sīālkūt, | | |
Dībālpūr, etc. | 3 | 33 |15,989
Sihrind | 1 | 29 |31,985
Ḥiṣār-fīrūza | 1 | 30 |75,174
The capital Dihlī and | | |
Mīān-dū-āb | 3 | 69 |50,254
Mīwāt, not included in | | |
Sikandar's time | 1 | 69 |81,000
Bīāna | 1 | 44 |14,930 [Sidenote:
Āgra | | 29 |76,919 Fol. 292b.]
Mīān-wilāyat (Midlands) | 2 | 91 | 19
Gūālīār | 2 | 23 |57,450
Kālpī and Seho[n.]da | | |
(Seondhā) | 4 | 28 |55,950
Qanauj | 1 | 36 |63,358
Saṃbhal | 1 | 38 |44,000
Laknūr and Baksar | 1 | 39 |82,433
Khairābād | | 12 |65,000
Aūd (Oude) and Bahraj | | |
(Baraich) | 1 | 17 | 1,369 [Sidenote:
Jūnpūr | 4 | ·0 |88,333 Fol. 293.]
Karra and Mānikpūr | 1 | 63 |27,282
Bihār | 4 | 5 |60,000
Sarwār | 1 | 55 |17,506-1/2
Sāran | 1 | 10 |18,373
Champāran | 1 | 90 |86,060
Kandla | | 43 |30,300
Tirhut from Rāja | | |
Rup-narāīn's tribute, | | |
silver | | 2 |55,000
black (i.e. copper) | | 27 |50,000
Rantanbhūr from Būlī, | | |
Chātsū, and Malarna | | 20 |?00,000
Nagūr | -- | -- | --
Rāja Bikrāmajīt in | | |
Rantanbhūr | -- | -- | --
Kalanjarī | -- | -- | --
Rāja Bīr-sang-deo (or, | | |
Sang only) | -- | -- | --
Rāja Bikam-deo | -- | -- | --
Rāja Bikam-chand | -- | -- | --
--------------------------------+---------+-----+----------
[1916] So far as particulars and details about the land and people of
the country of Hindūstān have become definitely known, they have been
narrated and described; whatever matters worthy of record may come to
view hereafter, I shall write down.
HISTORICAL NARRATIVE RESUMED.
(_a. Distribution of treasure in Āgra._)[1917]
(_May 12th_) On Saturday the 29th[1918] of Rajab the examination and
distribution of the treasure were begun. To Humāyūn were given 70 laks
from the Treasury, and, over and above this, a treasure house was
bestowed on him just as it was, without ascertaining and writing down
its contents. To some begs 10 laks were given, 8, 7, or 6 to
others.[1919] Suitable money-gifts were bestowed from the Treasury on
the whole army, to every tribe there was, Afghān, Hazāra, `Arab, Bīlūch
_etc._ to each according to its position. Every trader and student,
indeed every man who had come with the army, took ample portion and
share of bounteous gift and largess. To those not with the army went a
mass of treasure in gift and largess, as for instance, 17 laks to
Kāmran, 15 laks to Muḥammad-i-zamān Mīrzā, while to `Askarī, Hindāl and
indeed to the whole various train of relations and younger
children[1920] went masses of red and white (gold and silver), of
plenishing, jewels and slaves.[1921] Many gifts went to the begs and
soldiery on that side (Tramontana). Valuable gifts (_saughāt_)
[Sidenote: Fol. 294.] were sent for the various relations in Samarkand,
Khurāsān, Kāshghar and `Irāq. To holy men belonging to Samarkand and
Khurāsān went offerings vowed to God (_nuẕūr_); so too to Makka and
Madīna. We gave one _shāhrukhi_ for every soul in the country of Kābul
and the valley-side[1922] of Varsak, man and woman, bond and free, of
age or non-age.[1923]
(_b. Disaffection to Bābur._)
On our first coming to Āgra, there was remarkable dislike and hostility
between its people and mine, the peasantry and soldiers running away in
fear of our men. Dilhī and Āgra excepted, not a fortified town but
strengthened its defences and neither was in obedience nor submitted.
Qāsim Saṃbhalī was in Saṃbhal; Niẕām Khān was in Bīāna; in Mīwāt was
Ḥasan Khān Mīwātī himself, impious mannikin! who was the sole leader of
the trouble and mischief.[1924] Muḥammad _Zaitun_ was in Dūlpūr; Tātār
Khān _Sārang-khānī_[1925] was in Gūālīār; Ḥusain Khān _Nuḥānī_ was in
Rāprī; Quṯb Khān was in Itāwa (Etāwa); `Ālam Khān (_Kālpī_) was in
Kālpī. Qanauj and the other side of Gang (Ganges) was all held by
Afghāns in independent hostility,[1926] such as Naṣīr Khān _Nuḥānī_,
Ma`rūf _Farmūlī_ and a crowd of other amīrs. These had been in rebellion
for three or four years before Ibrāhīm's death and when I defeated him,
were holding Qanauj and the whole country beyond it. At the present time
they were lying two or three marches on our side of Qanauj and had made
Bihār Khān the son of Daryā Khān _Nuḥānī_ their _pādshāh_, under the
style Sulṯān Muḥammad. [Sidenote: Fol. 294b.] Marghūb the slave was in
Mahāwīn (_Muttra_?); he remained there, thus close, for some time but
came no nearer.
(_c. Discontent in Bābur's army._)
It was the hot-season when we came to Āgra. All the inhabitants
(_khalāīq_) had run away in terror. Neither grain for ourselves nor corn
for our horses was to be had. The villages, out of hostility and hatred
to us had taken to thieving and highway-robbery; there was no moving on
the roads. There had been no chance since the treasure was distributed
to send men in strength into the parganas and elsewhere. Moreover the
year was a very hot one; violent pestilential winds struck people down
in heaps together; masses began to die off.
On these accounts the greater part of the begs and best braves became
unwilling to stay in Hindūstān, indeed set their faces for leaving it.
It is no reproach to old and experienced begs if they speak of such
matters; even if they do so, this man (Bābur) has enough sense and
reason to get at what is honest or what is mutinous in their
representations, to distinguish between loss and gain. But as this man
had seen his task whole, for himself, when he resolved on it, what taste
was there in their reiterating that things should be done differently?
What recommends the expression of distasteful opinions by men of little
standing [Sidenote: Fol. 295.] (_kīchīk karīm_)? Here is a curious
thing:—This last time of our riding out from Kābul, a few men of little
standing had just been made begs; what I looked for from them was that
if I went through fire and water and came out again, they would have
gone in with me unhesitatingly, and with me have come out, that wherever
I went, there at my side would they be,—not that they would speak
against my fixed purpose, not that they would turn back from any task or
great affair on which, all counselling, all consenting, we had resolved,
so long as that counsel was not abandoned. Badly as these new begs
behaved, Secretary Aḥmadī and Treasurer Walī behaved still worse. Khwāja
Kalān had done well in the march out from Kābul, in Ibrāhīm's defeat and
until Āgra was occupied; he had spoken bold words and shewn ambitious
views. But a few days after the capture of Āgra, all his views
changed,—the one zealous for departure at any price was Khwāja
Kalān.[1927]
(_d. Bābur calls a council._)
When I knew of this unsteadiness amongst (my) people, I summoned all the
begs and took counsel. Said I, "There is no supremacy and grip on the
world without means and resources; without lands and retainers
sovereignty and command (_pādshāhlīq u amīrlīq_) are impossible. By the
labours of several years, by encountering hardship, by long travel, by
flinging myself and the army into battle, and by deadly slaughter, we,
through God's [Sidenote: Fol. 295b.] grace, beat these masses of enemies
in order that we might take their broad lands. And now what force
compels us, what necessity has arisen that we should, without cause,
abandon countries taken at such risk of life? Was it for us to remain in
Kābul, the sport of harsh poverty? Henceforth, let no well-wisher of
mine speak of such things! But let not those turn back from going who,
weak in strong persistence, have set their faces to depart!" By these
words, which recalled just and reasonable views to their minds, I made
them, willy-nilly, quit their fears.
(_e. Khwāja Kalān decides to leave Hindūstān._)
As Khwāja Kalān had no heart to stay in Hindūstān, matters were settled
in this way:—As he had many retainers, he was to convoy the gifts, and,
as there were few men in Kābul and Ghaznī, was to keep these places
guarded and victualled. I bestowed on him Ghaznī, Girdīz and the Sulṯān
Mas`ūdī Hazāra, gave also the Hindūstān _pargana_ of G'hūram,[1928]
worth 3 or 4 _laks_. It was settled for Khwāja Mīr-i-mīrān also to go to
Kābul; the gifts were put into his immediate charge, under the custody
of Mullā Ḥasan the banker (_ṣarrāf_) and Tūka[1929] _Hindū_.
Loathing Hindūstān, Khwāja Kalān, when on his way, had the following
couplet inscribed on the wall of his residence [Sidenote: Fol. 296.]
(_`imāratī_) in Dihlī:—
If safe and sound I cross the Sind,
Blacken my face ere I wish for Hind!
It was ill-mannered in him to compose and write up this partly-jesting
verse while I still stayed in Hind. If his departure