The Bābur-nāma in English (Memoirs of Bābur)

[2737] The author, or embroiderer, of that anonymous story did not know the _Bābur-nāma_ well, or he would not have described Bābur as a wine-drinker after 933 AH. The anecdote is parallel with Niẕāmu'd-dīn Aḥmad's, the one explaining why the Mīrzā was selected, the other why the _dāmād_ was dropped. [2738] _Bib. Ind._ i, 341; Ranking's trs. p. 448. [2739] The night-guard; perhaps Māhīm Begīm's brother (G. B.'s H. N. trs. pp. 27-8). [2740] G. B.'s H. N. trs. f. 34_b_, p. 138; Jauhar's _Memoirs of Humāyūn_, Stewart's trs. p. 82. [2741] Cf. G. B.'s H. N. trs. p. 216, Bio. App. _s.n._ Bega Begam. [2742] f. 128, p. 200 n. 3. Cf. Appendix U.—_Bābur's Gardens in and near Kābul_. [2743] Cf. H. H. Hayden's _Notes on some monuments in Afghānistān_, [_Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal_ ii, 344]; and _Journal asiatique_ 1888, M. J. Darmesteter's art. _Inscriptions de Caboul_. [2744] _ān_, a demonstrative suggesting that it refers to an original inscription on the second, but now absent, upright slab, which presumably would bear Bābur's name. [2745] Ruẓwān is the door-keeper of Paradise. [2746] Particulars of the women mentioned by Bābur, Ḥaidar, Gul-badan and other writers of their time, can be seen in my Biographical Appendix to the Begīm's _Humāyūn-nāma_. As the Appendix was published in 1902, variants from it occurring in this work are corrections superseding earlier and less-informed statements. [2747] _Tārīkh-i-rashīdī_ trs. Ney Elias and Ross p. 308. [2748] Bio. App. _s.n._ Gul-chihra. [2749] The story of the later uprisings against Māhīm's son Humāyūn by his brothers, by Muḥammad-i-zamān _Bāī-qarā_ and others of the same royal blood, and this in spite of Humāyūn's being his father's nominated successor, stirs surmise as to whether the rebels were not tempted by more than his defects of character to disregard his claim to supremacy; perhaps pride of higher maternal descent, this particularly amongst the Bāī-qarā group, may have deepened a disregard created by antagonisms of temperament. [2750] Until the Yāngī-ārīq was taken off the Sīr, late in the last century, for Namangān, the oasis land of Farghāna was fertilized, not from the river but by its intercepted tributaries. [2751] Ujfalvy's translation of Yāqūt (ii, 179) reads one _farsākh_ from the mountains instead of 'north of the river.' [2752] Kostenko describes a division of Tāshkīnt, one in which is Ravine-lane (_jar-kucha_), as divided by a deep ravine; of another he says that it is cut by deep ravines (Bābur's _`umīq jarlār_). [2753] Bābur writes as though Akhsī had one Gate only (f. 112_b_). It is unlikely that the town had come down to having a single exit; the Gate by which he got out of Akhsī was the one of military importance because served by a draw-bridge, presumably over the ravine-moat, and perhaps not close to that bridge. [2754] For mention of upper villages _see_ f. 110 and note 1. [2755] _Cf._ f. 114 for distances which would be useful in locating Akhsī if Bābur's _yīghāch_ were not variable; Ritter, vii, 3 and 733; Réclus, vi, index _s.n._ Farghāna; Ujfalvy ii, 168, his quotation from Yāqūt and his authorities; Nalivkine's _Histoire du Khanat de Kokand_, p. 14 and p. 53; Schuyler, i, 324; Kostenko, Tables of Contents for cognate general information and i, 320, for Tāshkīnt; von Schwarz, index under related names, and especially p. 345 and plates; Pumpelly, p. 18 and p. 115. [2756] This Turkī-Persian Dictionary was compiled by Mīrzā Mahdī Khān. Nādir Shāh's secretary and historian, whose life of his master Sir William Jones translated into French (Rieu's Turkī Cat. p. 264_b_). [2757] The _Pādshāh-nāma_ whose author, `Abdu'l-ḥamīd, the biographer of Shāh-jahān, died in 1065 AH. (1655 AD.) mentions the existence of lacunæ in a copy of the Bābur-nāma, in the Imperial Library and allowed by his wording to be Bābur's autograph MS. (i, 42 and ii, 703). [2758] _Akbar-nāma_, Bib. Ind. ed. i, 305; H. B. i, 571. [2759] Ḥai. MS. f. 118_b_; _aūshāl bāghdā sū āqīb kīlā dūr aīdī_. _Bābur-nāma_, _sū āqīb_, water flowed and _aūshal_ is rare, but in the R.P. occurs 7 times. [2760] _gūzūm āwīqī-ghā bārīb tūr._ B.N. f. 117_b_, _gūzūm āwīqū-ghā bārdī_. [2761] _kūrā dūr mīn_, B.N. f. 83, _tūsh kūrdūm_ and _tūsh kūrār mīn_. [2762] _ablaq suwār bīlān_; P. _suwār_ for T. _ātlīq_ or _ātlīq kīshī_; _bīlān_ for B.N. _bīla_, and an odd use of piebald (_ablaq_). [2763] _masnad_, B.N. _takht_, throne. _Masnad_ betrays Hindūstān. [2764] _Hamrā`īlārī (sic) bir bir gā (sic) maṣlaḥat qīlā dūrlār._ _Maṣlaḥat for B.N. kīngāsh_ or _kīngāīsh_; _hamrāh_, companion, for _mīnīng bīla bār_, etc. [2765] _bāghlāmāq_ and f. 119_b_ _bāghlāghānlār_; B.N. _ālmāk_ or _tūtmāq_ to seize or take prisoner. [2766] _dīwār_ for _tām_. [2767] f. 119, _āt-tīn aūzlār-nī tāshlāb_; B.N. _tūshmāk_, dismount. _Tāshlāmaq_ is not used in the sense of dismount by B. [2768] _pādshāh_ so used is an anachronism (f. 215); Bābur Mīrzā would be correct. [2769] _ẕāhirān_; B.N. _yāqīn_. [2770] Ilminsky's imprint stops at _dīb_; he may have taken _kīm-dīb_ for signs of quotation merely. (This I did earlier, JRAS 1902, p. 749.) [2771] Aligarh ed. p. 52; Rogers' trs. i, 109. [2772] _Cf._ f. 63_b_, n. 3. [2773] Another but less obvious objection will be mentioned later. [2774] Julien notes (_Voyages des pélerins Bouddhistes_, ii, 96), "Dans les annales des Song on trouve Nang-go-lo-ho, qui répond exactement à l'orthographe indienne Nangarahāra, que fournit l'inscription découvert par le capitaine Kittoe" (JASB. 1848). The reference is to the Ghoswāra inscription, of which Professor Kielhorn has also written (_Indian Antiquary_, 1888), but with departure from Nangarahāra to Nagarahāra. [2775] The scribe of the Ḥaidarābād Codex appears to have been somewhat uncertain as to the spelling of the name. What is found in histories is plain, N:g:r:hār. The other name varies; on first appearance (fol. 131_b_) and also on fols. 144 and 154_b_, there is a vagrant dot below the word, which if it were above would make Nīng-nahār. In all other cases the word reads N:g:nahār. Nahār is a constant component, as is also the letter _g_(or _k_). [2776] Some writers express the view that the medial _r_ in this word indicates descent from Nagarahāra, and that the medial _n_ of Elphinstone's second form is a corruption of it. Though this might be, it is true also that in local speech _r_ and _n_ often interchange, _e.g._ Chighār- and Chighān-sarāī, Sūhār and Sūhān (in Nūr-valley). [2777] This asserts _n_ to be the correct consonant, and connects with the interchange of _n_ and _r_ already noted. [2778] Since writing the above I have seen Laidlaw's almost identical suggestion of a nasal interpolated in Nagarahāra (JASB. 1848, art. on Kittoe). The change is of course found elsewhere; is not Tānk for Tāq an instance? [2779] These affluents I omit from main consideration as sponsors because they are less obvious units of taxable land than the direct affluents of the Kābul-river, but they remain a reserve force of argument and may or may not have counted in Bābur's nine. [2780] Cunningham, i, 42. My topic does not reach across the Kābul-river to the greater Udyānapūra of Beal's _Buddhist Records_ (p. 119) nor raise the question of the extent of that place. [2781] The strong form Nīng-nahār is due to euphonic impulse. [2782] Some discussion about these coins has already appeared in JRAS. 1913 and 1914 from Dr. Codrington, Mr. M. Longworth Dames and my husband. [2783] This variant from the Turkī may be significant. Should _tamghānat(-i-)sikka_ be read and does this describe countermarking? [2784] It will be observed that Bābur does not explicitly say that Ḥusain put the beg's name on the coin. [2785] _Ḥabību's-siyar_ lith. ed. iii, 228; _Ḥaidarābād_ Codex text and trs. f. 26_b_ and f. 169; Browne's Daulat Shāh p. 533. [2786] Ḥusain born 842 AH. (1438 AD.); d. 911 AH. (1506 AD.). [2787] Cf. f. 7_b_ note to braves (_yīgītlār_). There may be instances, in the earlier Farghāna section where I have translated _chuhra_ wrongly by _page_. My attention had not then been fixed on the passage about the coins, nor had I the same familiarity with the Kābul section. For a household page to be clearly recognizable as such from the context, is rare—other uses of the word are translated as their context dictates. [2788] They can be traced through my Index and in some cases their careers followed. Since I translated _chuhra-jīrga-si_ on f. 15_b_ by cadet-corps, I have found in the Kābul section instances of long service in the corps which make the word cadet, as it is used in English, too young a name. [2789] This Mr. M. Longworth Dames pointed out in JRAS. 1913. [2790] _Habību's-siyar_ lith. ed. iii, 219; Ferté trs. p. 28. For the information about Ḥusain's coins given in this appendix I am indebted to Dr. Codrington and Mr. M. Longworth Dames. [2791] Elphinstone MS. f. 150_b_; Ḥaidarābād MS. f. 190_b_; Ilminsky, imprint p. 241. [2792] Muḥ. Ma`ṣūm _Bhakkarí's Tārīkh-i-sind_ 1600, Malet's Trs. 1855, p. 89; Mohan Lall's _Journal_ 1834, p. 279 and _Travels_ 1846, p. 311; Bellew's _Political Mission to Afghānistān_ 1857, p. 232; _Journal Asiatique_ 1890, Darmesteter's _La grande inscription de Qandahār_; JRAS. 1898, Beames' _Geography of the Qandahār inscription_. Murray's _Hand-book of the Panjab etc._ 1883 has an account which as to the Inscriptions shares in the inaccuracies of its sources (Bellew & Lumsden). [2793] The plan of Qandahār given in the official account of the Second Afghān War, makes Chihil-zīna appear on the wrong side of the ridge, n.w. instead of n.e. [2794] destroyed in 1714 AD. It lay 3 m. west of the present Qandahār (not its immediate successor). It must be observed that Darmesteter's insufficient help in plans and maps led him to identify Chihil-zīna with Chihil-dukhtarān (Forty-daughters). [2795] _Tārīkh-i-rashīdī_ trs. p. 387; _Akbar-nāma_ trs. i, 290. [2796] Ḥai. Codex, Index _sn.n._ [2797] It is needless to say that a good deal in this story may be merely fear and supposition accepted as occurrence. [2798] Always left beyond the carpet on which a reception is held. [2799] This is not in agreement with Bābur's movements. [2800] _i.e._ Humāyūn wished for a full-brother or sister, another child in the house with him. The above names of his brother and sister are given elsewhere only by Gulbadan (f. 6_b_). [2801] The "we" might be Māhīm and Humāyūn, to Bābur in camp. [2802] Perhaps before announcing the birth anywhere. [2803] Presumably this plural is honorific for the Honoured Mother Māhīm. [2804] Māhīm's and Humāyūn's quarters. [2805] Gul-badan's _Humāyūn-nāma_, f. 8. [2806] JRAS. A. S. Beveridge's Notes on _Bābur-nāma_ MSS. 1900, [1902,] 1905, 1906, [1907,] 1908 (Kehr's transcript, p. 76, and Latin translation with new letter of Bābur p. 828). [2807] In all such matters of the _Bābur-nāma_ Codices, it has to be remembered that their number has been small. [2808] Vigne's _Travels in Kāshmīr_ ii, 277-8;