The Bābur-nāma in English (Memoirs of Bābur)
said to bear these names because it fastens in the string. Its shape is
that of the upper part of the Ar. letter _jīm_, two converging lines of
which the lower curves slightly outward. It serves to make good a warped
bow, without the use of fire and it should be kept upon the bow-tip till
this has reverted to its original state. Until the warp has been
straightened by the _gosha-gīr_, the bow must be kept from the action of
fire because it, (composite of sinew and glutinous substance,) is of the
nature of wax.
The same implement can be used to straighten the middle of the bow, the
_kamān khāna_. It is then called _kar-dāng_. It can be used there on
condition that there are not two _daur_ (curves) in the bow. If there
are two the bow cannot be repaired without fire. The _halāl daur_ is
said to be characteristic of the Turkish bow. There are three _daur_. I
am indebted to Mr. Inigo Simon for the suggestions that _daur_ in this
connection means _warp_ and that the three twists (_daur_) may be those
of one horn (_gosha_), of the whole bow warped in one curve, and of the
two horns warped in opposite directions.
Of repair to the _kamān-khāna_ it is said further that if no _kardāng_
be available, its work can be done by means of a stick and string, and
if the damage be slight only, the bow and the string can be tightly tied
together till the bow comes straight. 'And the cure is with God!'
Both manuscripts named contain much technical information. Some parts of
this are included in my husband's article, _Oriental Crossbows_ (A. Q.
R. 1911, p. 1). Sir Ralph Payne-Gallwey's interesting book on the
Cross-bow allows insight into the fine handicraft of Turkish bow-making.
D.—ON THE RESCUE PASSAGE.
I have omitted from my translation an account of Bābur's rescue from
expected death, although it is with the Ḥaidarābād Codex, because closer
acquaintance with its details has led both my husband and myself to
judge it spurious. We had welcomed it because, being with the true
Bābur-nāma text, it accredited the same account found in the
Kehr-Ilminsky text, and also because, however inefficiently, it did
something towards filling the gap found elsewhere within 908 AH.
It is in the Ḥaidarābād MS. (f. 118_b_), in Kehr's MS. (p. 385), in
Ilminsky's imprint (p. 144), in _Les Mémoires de Bābour_ (i, 255) and
with the St. P. University Codex, which is a copy of Kehr's.
On the other hand, it is not with the Elphinstone Codex (f. 89_b_); that
it was not with the archetype of that codex the scribe's note shews (f.
90); it is with neither of the _Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī_ (Pers. translations)
nor with Leyden and Erskine's _Memoirs_ (p. 122).[2757]
Before giving our grounds for rejecting what has been offered to fill
the gap of 908 AH. a few words must be said about the lacuna itself.
Nothing indicates that Bābur left it and, since both in the Elphinstone
Codex and its archetype, the sentence preceding it lacks the terminal
verb, it seems due merely to loss of pages. That the loss, if any, was
of early date is clear,—the Elph. MS. itself being copied not later than
1567 AD. (JRAS. 1907, p. 137).
Two known circumstances, both of earlier date than that of the
Elphinstone Codex, might have led to the loss,—the first is the storm
which in 935 AH. scattered Bābur's papers (f. 376_b_), the second, the
vicissitudes to which Humāyūn's library was exposed in his exile.[2758]
Of the two the first seems the more probable cause.
The rupture of a story at a point so critical as that of Bābur's danger
in Karnān would tempt to its completion; so too would wish to make good
the composed part of the Bābur-nāma. Humāyūn annotated the archetype of
the Elphinstone Codex a good deal but he cannot have written the Rescue
passage if only because he was in a position to avoid some of its
inaccuracies.
CONTEXT AND TRANSLATION OF THE RESCUE PASSAGE.
To facilitate reference, I quote the last words preceding the gap
purported to be filled by the Rescue passage, from several texts;—
(_a_) Elphinstone MS. f. 89_b_,—_Qūptūm. Bāgh gosha-sī-gha bārdīm. Aūzūm
bīla andesha qīldīm. Dīdīm kīm kīshī agar yūz u agar mīng yāshāsā, ākhir
hech...._
(_b_) The Ḥai. MS. (f. 118_b_) varies from the Elphinstone by omitting
the word _hech_ and adding _aūlmāk kīrāk_, he must die.
(_c_) Pāyanda-ḥasan's _Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī_ (I. O. 215, f.
96_b_),—_Barkhwāstam u dar gosha-i bāgh raftam. Ba khūd andesha karda,
guftam kah agar kase ṣad sāl yā hazār sāl `umr dāshta bāshad, ākhir hech
ast._ (It will be seen that this text has the _hech_ of the Elph. MS.)
(_d_) `Abdu'r-raḥīm's _Wāqi`āt-i-bāburī_ (I. O. 217, f.
79),—_Barkhwāstam u ba gosha-i-bāgh raftam. Ba khūd andeshīdam u guftam
kah agar kase ṣad sāl u agar hazār sāl `umr bayābad ākhir...._
(_e_) Muḥ. _Shīrāzī's_ lith. ed. (p. 75) finishes the sentence with
_ākhir khūd bāyad murd_, at last one must die,—varying as it frequently
does, from both of the _Wāqi`āt_.
(_f_) Kehr's MS. (p. 383-454), Ilminsky, p. 144,—_Qūpūb bāghnīng bīr
būrjī-ghā bārīb, khāṯirīm-ghā kīltūrdīm kīm agar adam yūz yīl u agar
mīng yīl tīrīk būlsā, ākhir aūlmāk dīn aūzkā chāra yūq tūr._ (I rose.
Having gone to a tower of the garden, I brought it to my mind that if a
person be alive 100 years or a thousand years, at last he has no help
other than to die.)
The Rescue passage is introduced by a Persian couplet, identified by my
husband as from Niẕāmī's _Khusrau u Shīrīn_, which is as follows;—
If you stay a hundred years, and if one year,
Forth you must go from this heart-delighting palace.
I steadied myself for death (_qarār bīrdīm_). In that garden a stream
came flowing;[2759] I made ablution; I recited the prayer of two
inclinations (_ra`kat_); having raised my head for silent prayer, I
was making earnest petition when my eyes closed in sleep.[2760] I am
seeing[2761] that Khwāja Yaq`ūb, the son of Khwāja Yaḥyā and
grandson of His Highness Khwāja `Ubaidu'l-lāh, came facing me,
mounted on a piebald horse, with a large company of piebald horsemen
(_sic_).[2762] He said: 'Lay sorrow aside! Khwāja _Aḥrār_ (_i.e._
`Ubaidu'l-lāh) has sent me to you; he said, "We, having asked help
for him (_i.e._ Bābur), will seat him on the royal throne;[2763]
wherever difficulty befalls him, let him look towards us (lit. bring
us to sight) and call us to mind; there will we be present." Now, in
this hour, victory and success are on your side; lift up your head!
awake!'
At that time I awoke happy, when Yūsuf and those with him[2764] were
giving one another advice. 'We will make a pretext to deceive; to
seize and bind[2765] is necessary.' Hearing these words, I said,
'Your words are of this sort, but I will see which of you will come
to my presence to take me.' I was saying this when outside the garden
wall[2766] came the noise of approaching horsemen. Yūsuf _darogha_
said, 'If we had taken you to Taṃbal our affairs would have gone
forward. Now he has sent again many persons to seize you.' He was
certain that this noise might be the footfall of the horses of those
sent by Taṃbal. On hearing those words anxiety grew upon me; what to
do I did not know. At this time those horsemen, not happening to find
the garden gate, broke down the wall where it was old (and) came in.
I saw (_kūrsām_, lit. might see) that Qutluq Muḥ. _Barlās_ and Bābā-i
_Pargharī_, my life-devoted servants, having arrived [with], it may
be, ten, fifteen, twenty persons, were approaching. Having flung
themselves from their horses,[2767] bent the knee from afar and
showed respect, they fell at my feet. In that state (_ḥal_) such
ecstasy (_ḥāl_) came over me that you might say (_goyā_) God gave me
life from a new source (_bāsh_). I said, 'Seize and bind that Yūsuf
_darogha_ and these here (_tūrghān_) hireling mannikins.' These same
mannikins had taken to flight. They (_i.e._ the rescuers), having
taken them, one by one, here and there, brought them bound. I said,
'Where do you come from? How did you get news?' Qutluq Muḥ. _Barlās_
said: 'When, having fled from Akhsī, we were separated from you in
the flight, we went to Andijān when the Khāns also came to Andijān. I
saw a vision that Khwāja `Ubaidu'l-lāh said, "Bābur _pādshāh_[2768]
is in a village called Karnān; go and bring him, since the royal seat
(_masnad_) has become his possession (_ta`alluq_)." I having seen
this vision and become happy, represented (the matter) to the Elder
Khān (and) the Younger Khān. I said to the Khāns, "I have five or six
younger brothers (and) sons; do you add a few soldiers. I will go
through the Karnān side and bring news." The Khāns said, "It occurs
to our minds also that (he) may have gone that same road (?)." They
appointed ten persons; they said, "Having gone in that direction
(_sārī_) and made very sure, bring news. Would to God you might get
true news!" We were saying this when Bābā-i _Parghārī_ said, "I too
will go and seek." He also having agreed with two young men, (his)
younger brothers, we rode out. It is three days to-day that we are
on the road. Thank God! we have found you.' They said (_dīdīlār_, for
_dīb_). They spoke (_aītīlār_), 'Make a move! Ride off! Take these
bound ones with you! To stay here is not well; Taṃbal has had news of
your coming here; go, in whatever way, and join yourself to the
Khāns!' At that time we having ridden out, moved towards Andijān. It
was two days that we had eaten no food; the evening prayer had come
when we found a sheep, went on, dismounted, killed, and roasted. Of
that same roast we ate as much as a feast. After that we rode on,
hurried forward, made a five days' journey in a day and two nights,
came and entered Andijān. I saluted my uncle the Elder Khān (and) my
uncle the Younger Khān, and made recital of past days. With the Khāns
I spent four months. My servants, who had gone looking in every
place, gathered themselves together; there were more than 300
persons. It came to my mind (_kīm_), 'How long must I wander, a
vagabond (_sar-gardān_),[2769] in this Farghāna country? I will make
search (_ṯalab_) on every side (_dīb_).' Having said, I rode out in
the month of Muḥarram to seek Khurāsān, and I went out from the
country of Farghāna.[2770]
REASONS AGAINST THE REJECTION OF THE RESCUE PASSAGE.
Two circumstances have weight against rejecting the passage, its
presence with the Ḥaidarābād Codex and its acceptance by Dr. Ilminsky
and M. de Courteille.
That it is with the Codex is a matter needing consideration and this the
more that it is the only extra matter there found. Not being with the
Persian translations, it cannot be of early date. It seems likely to owe
its place of honour to distinguished authorship and may well be one of
the four portions (_juzwe_) mentioned by Jahāngīr in the
Tuzūk-i-jahāngīrī,[2771] as added by himself to his ancestor's book. If
so, it may be mentioned, it will have been with Bābur's autograph MS.
[now not to be found], from which the Ḥaidarābād Codex shews signs of
being a direct copy.[2772]
[The incongruity of the Rescue passage with the true text has been
indicated by foot-notes to the translation of it already given. What
condemns it on historic and other grounds will follow.]
On linguistic grounds it is a strong argument in its favour that Dr.
Ilminsky and M. de Courteille should have accepted it but the argument
loses weight when some of the circumstances of their work are taken into
account.
In the first place, it is not strictly accurate to regard Dr. Ilminsky
as accepting it unquestioned, because it is covered by his depreciatory