In Volume 1-1: Qurʾānic Literature, History, and Biography | Section 2, History, Biography, etc.

previous chapter: 11 History of China and Japan

[For the general histories of the Muḥammadan world, including India, see pp. 46–123 of this work.]

§ 612. A certain “ʿIṣāmī” composed in 750/1349–50 and dedicated to ʿAlāʾ al-Dunyā wa-’l-Dīn Abū ’l-Muẓaffar Bahman-S̲h̲āh Sulṭān, the first ruler of the Bahmanī dynasty, his

Futūḥ al-salāṭīn, an epic poem on the rulers of India from the G̲h̲aznawids to the date of composition, one of the authorities of the Ṭabaqāt i Akbarī: Ethé 895 (damaged. 16th cent.), Ḥaidarābād Maulawī M. G̲h̲aut̲h̲’s Library (see Oriental College Magazine, vol. xiv no. 1 (Nov. 1937) p. 90¹), possibly also Rehatsek p. 131 no. 16 (cf. p. 388 infra) and Āṣafīyah i p. 226 no. 673 (cf. p. 388 infra).

Edition: Āgrah 1938 (ed. Āg̲h̲ā Mahdī Ḥusain).

Description etc.: ʿIṣāmī-nāmah, by S. Yūs̲h̲aʿ, Madras 1937 (see Oriental College Magazine, vol. xiv no. 1 (Nov. 1937) p. 89).

§ 613. K̲h̲wājah Niẓām al-Dīn Aḥmad b. M. Muqīm al-Harawī was appointed Bak̲h̲s̲h̲ī of Gujrāt in Akbar’s 29th regnal year and Bak̲h̲s̲h̲ī of the empire in the 37th year. He died at the age of 45 on 23 Ṣafar 1003/1594, the 39th year.

¶ Ṭabaqāt i Akbarī, as it is usually called, or Ṭabaqāt i Akbar-S̲h̲āhī, as the author himself called it, or Tārīk̲h̲ i Niẓāmī, as it is sometimes called, written ah 1001/1592–3 (but Akbar’s reign is brought down to the end of the 38th year ah 1002/1593–4), the earliest of the general histories of India and the basis of subsequent works like the Muntak̲h̲ab al-tawārīk̲h̲ and the Guls̲h̲an i Ibrāhīmī, divided into a muqaddimah (the G̲h̲aznawids). nine ṭabaqāt ((1) Delhi ah 574/1178–1002/1593 concluding with notices of celebrated men of Akbar’s time, (2) the Deccan ah 748/1347–1002/1593, (3) Gujrāt ah 793/1390–980/1572, (4) Mālwah ah 809/1406–977/1569, (5) Bengal ah 741/1340–984/1576, (6) Jaunpūr ah 784/1382–881/1476, (7) Kas̲h̲mīr ah 747/1346–995/1586, (8) Sind ah 86/705–1001/1592, (9) Multān ah 847/1443–923/1517) and a geographical k̲h̲ātimah (apparently never finished, since in the mss. it consists of only a few lines): ʿAlīgaṛh Subḥ. mss. p. 57 no. 954 (3) (ah 1003/1594–5), Rieu iii 906a (lacks circ. 40 foll, at beginning. Late 16th cent.), 906a (transcribed from the preceding, ad 1854), i 220a (17th cent.), 221b (ah 1049/1640), 221b (18th cent.), 222a (from Balban to Ibrāhīm Lōdī. 17th cent.), 222a (Bābur and Humāyūn. 19th cent.), Eton 182 (ah 1020/1611–12), 183 (ah 1059/1649), Ethé 225 (ah 1031/1622), 226 (ah 1069/1659), 227, 228, 229 (lacks Ṭabaqah ix. Collated ah 1079/1669), 230 (Muqaddimah and Ṭabaqah i. ah 1066/1656), 231 (Muqaddimah and part of Ṭabaqah i. ah 1103/1691), 232 (portion relating to S̲h̲ēr S̲h̲āh. ah 1046/1636), ii 3014 (Ṭabaqah iii), Bodleian 184 (ah 1049/1639), 185 (ah 1088/1677), 186–191 (six undated copies, of which 190 is described as very good, 191 (Muqaddimah and most of Ṭabaqah i) as old, and 189 as differing in arrangement), Oxford Ind. Inst. ms. Pers. A. iv 54 (ah 1131/1719), Vollers 972 (ah 1063/1653), 973, Blochet i 530 (lacks Ṭabaqah ix and k̲h̲ātimah. Mid 17th cent.), 531 (Muqaddimah and Ṭabaqah i. ah 1089/1678), 532 (Muqaddimah and Ṭabaqah i. Late 17th cent.), 533 (Ṭabaqāt ii, iii, v, vi (?), vii. 17th–18th cent.), Aumer 235 (collated ah 1081/1670–1), Bānkīpūr vii 535 (lacks Ṭabaqah iv. 17th cent.), Mehren p. 21 no. 56 (Akbar’s reign from ah 969 to 1001. Copied ah 1114/1702–3), Ivanow 115 (early 12th cent, h.), 116 (12th cent, h.), Curzon 24 (defective. 18th cent.), 25 (defective. 18th cent.), Lindesiana p. 205 no. 934 (circ. ad 1750), no. 405 (circ. ad 1780–1830), Būhār 60 (23rd year of S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam’s reign = 1195–6/1781–2), Berlin 485 (ad 1809), Āṣafīyah i p. 246 no. 732 (ah 1298/1881), p. 226 no. 720 (part relating to the Deccan), Edinburgh 77 (old), Lahore Panjab Univ. Lib. (one nearly complete copy and one of the Delhi ṭabaqah only. See Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii, no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926) pp. 45–6), r.a.s. P. 59 = Morley 46 (defective), Rehatsek p. 100 no. 54, Salemann-Rosen p. 12 no. 269* (“jild i awwal az Tārīk̲h̲ i Akbar-S̲h̲āhī?”. Author not stated).

¶ Editions: Ṭabaqāt i Akbarī [Lucknow,] 1870°, 1292/1875*, Calcutta 1913– (edited by B. De. Bibliotheca Indica. The three parts so far published (in 1913, 1927 and 1931) contain the Muqaddimah and the whole of Ṭabaqah i).

English translation: by B. De, Calcutta 1913—(Bibliotheca Indica. The two fasciculi published in 1913 and 1927 form “vol. i” of the translation and contain the history to the end of Ibrāhīm Lōdī’s reign. “Vol. ii,” published in 1936, carries the translation to the end of Ṭabaqah i).

Translations of extracts: (1) Elliot Bibliographical index pp. 186–203. (2) Elliot and Dowson History of India v pp. 187–476 (translated by J. Dowson).

Descriptions: (1) Elliot Bibliographical index pp. 178–80, 183, 203–4. (2) Elliot and Dowson History of India v pp. 177–87.

Anonymous epitome: (Muntak̲h̲ab i Ṭabaqāt i Akbarī) i.o. D.P. 746.

Condensed extract relating to various dynasties of the Deccan (only?): D̲h̲ikr i aḥwāl i salāṭīn i Hindūstān, Ivanow 117 (ad 1811).

[Muntak̲h̲ab al-tawārīk̲h̲ ii 397; Maʾāt̲h̲ir al-umarāʾ i 660–4 (English translation in Elliot and Dowson History of India v 178–80); Elliot Bibliographical Index i 180–5; Elliot and Dowson History of India v 178–83, vi 130; Rieu i 220; K̲h̲wājah Niẓām al-Dīn Aḥmad (in Urdu) by S. Aḥmad Allāh Qādirī (in the Urdu periodical Maʿārif, Aʿẓamgaṛh, August 1931, pp. 121–37); Ency. Isl. under Niẓām al-Dīn.]

§ 614. ʿAbd al-Qādir “Qādirī” b. Mulūk-S̲h̲āh b. Ḥāmid Badāʾūnī¹ was born on 17 Rabīʿ ii ah 947/21 August 1540² at Tōdah³ [i.e. apparently Toda Bhim, now in the state of Jaipūr]. Soon afterwards he seems to have been taken to ¶ Basāwar,⁴ evidently for a time at least the home of his family.⁵ At the age of twelve he was at Sambhal, where his father had taken him to pursue his studies under S̲h̲aik̲h̲ Ḥātim Sanbhalī (M. al-t. i p. 425, iii pp. 2, 66).⁶ In 966/1558–9 he went from Basāwar to study at Āgrah (M. al-t. ii p. 32) and for some years he was a pupil of S̲h̲aik̲h̲ Mubārak Nāgaurī (M. al-t. iii pp. 67, 74). In 969/1562 his father died at Āgrah (M. al-t. ii p. 53), and not long after he evidently removed to Badāʾūṅ. He was there, for example, in 971/1563–4 (M. al-t. ii p. 73), and it was there that he married for the second time in 975/1567–8 (M. al-t. ii p. 105). In 973/1565–6, however, leaving Badāʾūṅ, he entered the service of Ḥusain K̲h̲ān, the Jāgīrdār of Paṭiyālī, and remained with him for nearly nine years (M. al-t. ii pp. 86–7, 222), moving with him when his jāgīr was transferred to Lucknow and again to Kānt u Gōlah.

It was at the end of 981/1574 that ʿAbd al-Qādir, having severed his connexion with Ḥusain K̲h̲ān, went from Badāʾūṅ to Āgrah and was presented to Akbar through the influence of Jalāl K̲h̲ān Qūrc̲h̲ī and Ḥakīm ʿAin al-Mulk (M. al-t. ii p. 172). In 982/1574–5 he was appointed an imām (M. al-t. ii p. 206) and in 983/1575–6 he became one of the seven imāms and was instructed to lead the prayers on Wednesdays (M. al-t. ii p. 226). In the same year he was granted 1,000 bīg’hās of land as a madad i maʿās̲h̲ (originally at Basāwar, but in 997/1588–9 the grant was transferred to Badāʾūṅ. M. al-t. ii p. 368). From 982/1574 onwards he took a prominent part in the literary activities—mainly historiography and the translation of Hindu works into Persian—which Akbar promoted. His religious orthodoxy made him unsympathetic to Akbar’s free-thought and he regarded his master’s innovations with a disapproval which he does not conceal in the Muntak̲h̲ab al-tawārīk̲h̲. It is stated in the K̲h̲izānah i ʿāmirah on the authority of a pupil of his that he died in 1004/1595–6. According to the Mirʾāt i jahān-numā, however, he died in 1006/1597–8 and according to the Ṭabaqāt i S̲h̲āh-Jahānī in 1024/1615. According to Bak̲h̲tāwar Sing’h’s Urdu Tārīk̲h̲ i Badāyūṅ (quoted by Blochmann, j.a.s.b. 38, Pt. i (1869) p. 143) his grave is at ʿAtāpūr near Badāʾūṅ.

The works with which ʿAbd al-Qādir’s name is associated as author, epitomator, translator or collaborator are the following:

(1)

¶ Kitāb al-aḥādīt̲h̲ (a chronogram = 978/1570–1), a collection of forty traditions on the merit of waging war. Presented to Akbar in 986/1578 (see M. al-t. ii p. 255), but now apparently lost.

(2)

Nāmah i k̲h̲irad-afzā (a chronogram = 989/1581), a translation of the Sing’hāsan battīsī undertaken by Akbar’s order in 982/1574 and begun immediately with the help of a pandit designated by Akbar (M. al-t. ii pp. 183–4). The date indicated by the chronogram is puzzling and is not explained by ʿAbd al-Qādir’s further statement (M. al-t. i 67) that he translated this work first in 982 and again in 1003. Several Persian translations of this work are extant, but none of them seems to be definitely identifiable with ʿAbd al-Qādir’s.

(3)

Razm-nāmah, a translation of the Mahābhārata undertaken by Akbar’s order in 990/1582 (M. al-t. ii p. 319). In this enterprise ʿAbd al-Qādir had only a small share, being associated with Naqīb K̲h̲ān (for whom see p. 92, n. 56, supra) for three or four months during which a translation of two of the eighteen parvas was produced. For manuscripts of this translation see Rieu i 57, Ethé 1928–46, Bodleian 1306–12 etc.

(4)

Tarjamah i kitāb i Rāmāyan, a translation or abridgment of the Rāmāyaṇa undertaken by Akbar’s order in 992/1584, completed in four years and submitted to Akbar in 997/1589 (M. al-t. ii 336, 366).

(5)

Tārīk̲h̲ i alfī. The part taken by ʿAbd al-Qādir in the compilation of this history has already been mentioned (pp. 93–94 supra).

(6)

Najāt al-ras̲h̲īd (a chronogram = 999/1590–1), described by Blochmann as a polemical work and by Ivanow as “a Sufico-ethical treatise, richly interspersed with interesting historical anecdotes, controversial discussions, etc.” It contains inter alia an account of the Mahdawī sect. ʿAbd al-Qādir makes a passing reference to this work in M. al-t. ii p. 208. For a manuscript see Ivanow 1263.

(7)

Tarjamah i Tārīk̲h̲ i Kas̲h̲mīr. In 999/1590 by Akbar’s order he rewrote and abridged a translation made for Akbar by Mullā S̲h̲āh-Muḥammad S̲h̲āhābādī of a history of Kas̲h̲mīr [probably the Rāja-taraṅgiṇī]. M. al-t. ii p. 374.

(8)

Tarjamah i Muʿjam al-buldān. In 999/1590 he was one of ten or twelve persons, both ʿIrāqīs and Indians, who collaborated in a translation of Yāqūt’s geographical dictionary. He completed his portion, one twentieth of the whole, in one month (M. al-t. ii p. 375). This translation does not seem to be preserved.

(9)

Intik̲h̲āb i Jāmiʿ i Ras̲h̲īdī. In 1000/1591–2 he was instructed by Akbar to epitomise the Jāmiʿ al-tawārīk̲h̲, evidently the Arabic version (see p. 57 supra), since he speaks of translating from Arabic. The words in which ¶ he describes the result of his labours (M. al-t. ii p. 384) suggest that he epitomised only a part of the work.

(10)

Baḥr al-asmār. In 1003/1595 he was ordered to complete the Baḥr al-asmār, a fragmentary translation of a “Hindī” (i.e. no doubt Sanskrit) tale (afsānah)⁷ made for the Sulṭān Zain al-ʿĀbidīn of Kas̲h̲mīr (ah 820–872). In five months he translated the last volume (jild i ak̲h̲īr) of this work and then received instructions to modernise the old Persian of the earlier translation (jild i awwal). When he wrote about this in the Muntak̲h̲ab al-tawārīk̲h̲ (ii pp. 401–2) he was hoping to finish the work in two or three months.

In 983/1575–6 he had taken part in the unsuccessful attempt to produce a translation of the At’harva Vēda (M. al-t. ii p. 212).

Muntak̲h̲ab al-tawārīk̲h̲, often called Tārīk̲h̲ i Badāʾūnī, a history of India from the time of Subuktigīn ah 367/997–8 to ah 1004/1595–6, the fortieth year of Akbar’s reign, followed by short biographies of contemporary s̲h̲aik̲h̲s, scholars, physicians and poets (the notices of the last being based on the Nafāʾis al-maʾāt̲h̲ir of “Kāmī”): Blochet i 534 (ah 1132/1719–20), Bānkīpūr vii 536 (ah 1141/1729), Bodleian 192 (ah 1143/1730), 193 (n.d.), 194 (part ii only (i.e. Akbar’s reign with the biographies of saints and poets), ah 1219/1804), Ethé 234 (vol. i only. ah 1159/1746), 233 (n.d.), Rieu i 2226 (18th cent.), 223a (18th cent.), iii 906b (circ. ad 1850), 906b (extracts. Circ. ad 1850), 1030b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), Ivanow 119 (ah 1255/1839–40), 118 (early 13th cent, h.), 120 (13th/19th cent.), 121 (Akbar’s reign etc. ah 1267/1850–1), Āṣafīyah i p. 254 no. 197, Aumer 247 (apparently, to judge from the opening words. History of India from ah 923/1517 (accession of Ibrāhīm Lōdī) to ah 1002/1593–4 (Akbar’s 39th regnal year) with appendix on the contemporary s̲h̲aik̲h̲s), Berlin 469, Browne Suppt. 1252 (King’s 77), Eton 162.

Abridgment made in 1049/1639–40 by Ṭahmāsp-Qulī: Berlin 470.

Editions: Calcutta 1864–9°* (edited by Aḥmad ʿAlī, Kabīr al-Dīn Aḥmad, and W. Nassau Lees. Bibliotheca Indica), Lucknow 1868°*.

English translation: Muntak̲h̲abu-t-tawárík̲h̲ by ʿAbdu-l-Qádir ibn i Mulúk Sháh known as al-Badáóní [sic] translated … [vol. i [from the beginning of the work to Humāyūn’s death] by G.S.A. Ranking, Calcutta 1895–9°*, vol. ii [Akbar’s reign] by W.H. Lowe, Calcutta 1884–98°*, ¶ reprinted 1924*, vol. iii [biographies of saints, poets etc.] by T.W. Haig, Calcutta 1899–1925°*. Bibliotheca Indica].

Condensed translation by W. Erskine: b.m. ms. Add. 26,609.

Translated extracts: (1) Elliot Bibliographical index, Calcutta 1849*, pp. 227–58. (2) The Emperor Akbar’s repudiation of Esllám and profession of his own religion, called “Tovohhyd Elahy Akbar Shahy” or “Akbar Shah’s Divine Monotheism”. Consisting of passages from the Muntakhab al-Tawárikh of Abd al-Qádir bin-i Malúk Shah Al-Badáuni. Translated by E. Rehatsek. Bombay 1866°*. (3) Elliot and Dowson History of India v 485–549 (translated by H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson). (4) [Extracts relating to Akbar’s reign translated by J. Leyden] b.m. ms. Add. 26,601.

The passages relating to Akbar’s new religion were summarised by H.H. Wilson in an article entitled Account of the religious innovations attempted by Akbar, which he contributed to the Quarterly Oriental Magazine, Calcutta, 1824, vol. i, pt. i, pp. 49–62 and which was reprinted in Works by the late Horace Hayman Wilson, vol. ii, London 1862, pp. 379–400.

Descriptions: (1) Elliot Bibliographical index, pp. 219–26. (2) H. Blochmann Badáoní and his works (in j.a.s.b. 38 (1869), pt. i, pp. 105–44).

[Autobiographical statements in the Muntak̲h̲ab al-tawārīk̲h̲ (some, not by any means all, of these are collected in the 16-page biography prefixed to vol. iii of the Calcutta edition and a few are translated in Elliot’s Bibliographical index and History of India); Ṭabaqāt i Akbarī ii p. 468; Āʾīn i Akbarī tr. Blochmann i 104 (translation of the Mahābhārata), 104 n. 2 (a brief biography by Blochmann), 547 (merely his name in the list of scholars); Mirʾāt al-ʿālam (quoted in M. al-t. iii, preface, p. 12 foll.); K̲h̲izānah i ʿāmirah p. 323, no. 79; H. Blochmann Badáoní and his works (in j.a.s.b. 38 (1869), pt. i, pp. 105–44); Rieu i 222, iii 1082b ad 222; Raḥmān ʿAlī 130; Ency. Isl. under Badāʾūnī; Bānkīpūr vii pp. 6–8.]

§ 615. ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq Dihlawī, who died in 1052/1642, has already been mentioned as the author of the S̲h̲arḥ Sufar al-saʿādah (p. 142 supra), the Madārij al-nubuwwah (p. 152 supra), the Aḥwāl i Aʾimmah i It̲h̲nā-ʿas̲h̲ar (p. 168 supra) and the Jad̲h̲b al-qulūb ilā diyār al-maḥbūb (p. 336 supra).

Dh̲ikr al-mulūk, or Tārīk̲h̲ i Ḥaqqī, completed ah 1005/1596–7, a concise history of India from the time of Muʿizz al-Dīn M. b. Sām to that of Akbar based on the Ṭabaqāt i Nāṣirī, the Tārīk̲h̲ i Fīrōz-S̲h̲āhī (of Baranī), the Tārīk̲h̲ i Bahādur-S̲h̲āhī and, for the period from Buhlūl Lōdī onwards, on oral tradition and personal observation: Bānkīpūr vii 537 (ah 1023/1614), Bodleian 195 (with a continuation (little more than dates) to ¶ ah 1044/1634. Old), 196 (with the same continuation), 197 (n.d.), 198 (ah 1039/1629), Rieu ii 855b (ah 1066/1656), 823 (ah 1129/1717), i 223b (a later and enlarged recension. ah 1136/1724), Āṣafīyah i p. 224 no. 612 (29th year of Aurangzēb), Browne Pers. Cat. 81 (ah 1221/1807), r.a.s. P. 60 = Morley 47.

Description, 5 pp. of extracts and translated extract of 1 1/2 pp.: Elliot Bibliographical index to the historians of Muhammedan India pp. 273–80, and (Arabic pagination) 60–4.

Description and translated extract of 2 pp.: Elliot and Dowson History of India vi pp. 175–81.

§ 616. Nūr al-Ḥaqq al-Mas̲h̲riqī al-Dihlawī al-Buk̲h̲ārī was the son of ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq Dihlawī, whose D̲h̲ikr al-mulūk or Tārīk̲h̲ i Ḥaqqī has just been mentioned and whom he succeeded as a religious teacher at Delhi. In S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s time he became Qāḍī at Akbarābād (i.e. Āgrah). He died at Delhi in 1073/1662 at the age of ninety. Among his works were a Persian commentary on the Saḥīḥ of al-Buk̲h̲ārī entitled Taisīr al-qārī fī s̲h̲arḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Buk̲h̲ārī (see Brockelmann 1st Suppt. p. 263 no. 31), a Persian commentary on the Ṣaḥīḥ of Muslim entitled Manbaʿ al-ʿilm fī s̲h̲arḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim revised and enlarged by his son Fak̲h̲r al-Dīn Muḥibb Allāh (see Brockelmann 1st Suppt. p. 266 no. 13) and a commentary on “K̲h̲usrau’s” Qirān al-saʿdain entitled Nūr al-ʿain fī s̲h̲arḥ Qirān al-saʿdain (see Rieu ii 617b, Ivanow Curzon 220, Sprenger 330).

Zubdat al-tawārīk̲h̲, a general history of India from Muʿizz al-Dīn M. b. Sām to the accession of Jahāngīr (ah 1014/1605), being a much enlarged edition and continuation of his father’s history: Blochet i 535 (ah 1068/1657–8), iv 2324 (ah 1104/1692–3), Lindesiana p. 207 no. 384 (ah 1082/1671–2), Rieu i 224b (17th cent.), ii 821b (portion only. 17th cent.), 906b (17th cent.), iii 1039b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), Browne Suppt. 733 (ah 1118/1706–7. Corpus 220), Berlin 471 (ah 1197/1783), Āṣafīyah i p. 242 no. 160, Ethé 290.

Extracts: Elliot Bibliographical index, Muntak̲h̲abāt pp. 65–8.

Translations of extracts: (1) Elliot Bibliographical index pp. 283–96. (2) Elliot and Dowson History of India vi pp. 184–94.

Descriptions: (1) Elliot Bibliographical index pp. 281–97. (2) Elliot and Dowson History of India vi pp. 182–4.

[ʿAmal i Ṣāliḥ (b.m. ms. Add. 26,221 = Rieu i 263, fol. 692b, i.e. the 19th leaf from the end of the work); Mirʾāt al-ʿālam (b.m. ms. Add. 7657 = Rieu i 1256, fol. 455a, i.e. the 43rd leaf from the end); Subḥat al-marjān 53; Farḥat al-nāẓirīn (passage quoted in Oriental College Magazine iv no. 4 (Aug. 1928) pp. 58–9); K̲h̲azīnat ¶ al-aṣfiyāʾ ii 356; Itḥāf al-nubalāʾ 426; Rieu i 224b; Ḥadāʾiq al-Ḥanafīyah 418; Raḥmān ʿAlī 246; Ency. Isl. under Dihlawī.]

§ 617. M. Qāsim Hindū-s̲h̲āh⁸ Astarābādī known as (al-mas̲h̲hūr bi-) Firis̲h̲tah, as he calls himself in the Guls̲h̲an i Ibrāhīmī, or M. Qāsim sumamed (al-mulaqqab bi-) Hindū-S̲h̲āh known as (al-mas̲h̲hūr bi-) Firis̲h̲tah, as he calls himself in the Dastūr al-aṭibbāʾ, was the son of G̲h̲ulām-‘Alī Hindū-S̲h̲āh [see Bombay ed. ii p. 449, [Lucknow] ed. ii p. 120]. Neither the date nor the place of his birth seems to be known.⁹ On reaching years of discretion Firis̲h̲tah entered the service of Murtaḍā Nīẓām-S̲h̲āh¹⁰ (ruler of Aḥmadnagar ah 972/1565–996/1588¹¹), and it was at Aḥmadnagar that, while still in the prime of youth,¹² he conceived the idea of writing a history of the Islāmic kings and saints of India. At ¶ Aḥmadnagar, however, he was unable to obtain all the historical works that he desired and so his project had to be deferred. When the Prime Minister Mīrzā K̲h̲ān¹³ (Sulṭān Ḥusain Sabzawārī) plotted with Dilāwar K̲h̲ān, Regent of Bījāpūr, to depose Murtaḍā Niẓām-S̲h̲āh in favour of his son Mīrān Ḥusain and mobilised an army ostensibly to defend the kingdom of Aḥmadnagar against the forces of Bījāpūr, which by arrangement had assembled on the frontier, Firis̲h̲tah was sent by the king to find out what was really happening.¹⁴ Mīrzā K̲h̲ān, knowing that Firis̲h̲tah’s loyalty to the king would cause him to make a true report, intended, when he joined the army a little later, to arrest Firis̲h̲tah, but the latter was warned by a friend and managed to escape on a dromedary. He disclosed the plot to the king and, on being asked for his advice, made certain recommendations. Yielding to the persuasion of a disloyal favourite, the king decided to remain in the palace, contrary to Firis̲h̲tah’s advice. Hearing of this, the troops who had remained loyal lost heart and left Ahmadnagar to join Mīrzā K̲h̲ān. Firis̲h̲tah, who was apparently captain of the palace guard¹⁵ or something of that kind, and five or six others were all who remained in the palace with the king. Not long afterwards Mīrzā K̲h̲ān and Mīrān Ḥusain with thirty or forty ruffians entered the palace and Firis̲h̲tah would have been killed if Mīrān Ḥusain had not recognised him and, respecting his claims as a school-fellow,¹⁶ spared his life.

The deposition and murder of Mīrān Ḥusain Niẓām-S̲h̲āh after a reign of only ten months led to xenophobic disturbances and a massacre from which few “foreigners” (g̲h̲arībān, i.e. non-Dakanīs, and their descendants, g̲h̲arīb-zādahā) escaped, and these, less than 300 in number, were expelled to Bījāpūr on the “ʿĪd i Ramaḍān” 997/1589. Through the influence of Dilāwar K̲h̲ān, Regent during the minority of Ibrāhīm ʿĀdil-S̲h̲āh ii, they were given ¶ appointments, and on 19 Ṣafar 998/28 Dec. 1589 Firis̲h̲tah was presented at court and entered the government service at Bījāpūr.¹⁷

At the end of Rabīʿ al-Awwal 998/1590 Burhān Nizām-S̲h̲āh, desiring to obtain the throne of Aḥmadnagar, then occupied by his son, Ismāʿīl, sent messengers to Firis̲h̲tah with an autograph parwānah asking him to place before the King of Bījāpūr some letters appealing for support. Firis̲h̲tah took the messengers to Dilāwar K̲h̲ān, the Regent, who submitted the letters to the king and obtained his consent to a campaign.¹⁸ In a battle which ensued between Dilāwar K̲h̲ān and Jamāl K̲h̲ān, the dictator of Aḥmadnagar, Firis̲h̲tah was wounded and after fleeing to Dārāsang fell into the hands of Jamāl K̲h̲ān but escaped by a stratagem.¹⁹ In Rajab of the same year he was among those who accompanied the king on the night journey against Dilāwar K̲h̲ān, which resulted in the latter’s fall and flight to Bīdar.²⁰

In Ṣafar 1013/July 1604 Firis̲h̲tah accompanied the palanquin of Bēgam Sultān, Ibrāhīm ʿĀdil-S̲h̲āh’s daughter, from Bījāpūr to Paiṭhan on the Gōdāvarī, where she was married to Akbar’s son Dāniyāl, and thence to Burhānpūr, where Dāniyāl died a few months later.²¹ At the beginning of Jahāngīr’s reign (ah 1014/1605–1037/1628) Firis̲h̲tah was sent to Lahore by Ibrāhīm ʿĀdil-S̲h̲āh for a purpose which is not specified.²² In 1023/1614 he visited the fortress of Asīr,²³ and he was still alive in 1033/1623–4, if the record of the death of Bahādur K̲h̲ān Fārūqī at Āgrah in that year²⁴ was not inserted in his history by a later hand.

¶ As Firis̲h̲tah tells us in two places,²⁵ he was encouraged in the writing of his history by Ibrāhīm ʿĀdil-S̲h̲āh, who on an occasion when he was presented at court by S̲h̲āh-nawāz K̲h̲ān (K̲h̲wājah Saʿd al-Dīn ʿInāyat-Allāh S̲h̲īrāzī) gave him a copy of the Rauḍat al-ṣafāʾ (for which see p. 71 supra) and instructed him to write a history of India which should be an improvement upon the very concise and, especially in matters relating to the Deccan, inadequate history of Niẓām al-Dīn Aḥmad Bak̲h̲s̲h̲ī. He also received much encouragement from S̲h̲āh-nawāz K̲h̲ān.²⁶ Firis̲h̲tah wrote also an exposition of the Indian system of medicine, entitled Dastūr al-aṭibbāʾ and often called Ik̲h̲tiyārāt i Qāsimī, which is extant in many manuscripts (e.g. Rieu Suppt. 160, Ethé 2318–24, cf. Fonahn Zur Quellenkunde der persischen Medizin pp. 22–3).

Guls̲h̲an i Ibrāhīmī, usually called Tārīk̲h̲ i Firis̲h̲tah, a general history of India dedicated to Ibrāhīm ʿĀdil-S̲h̲āh and existing in two slightly different recensions, the first dated (in the preface) 1015/1606–7, the second, with a new title, Tārīk̲h̲ i Nauras-nāmah, 1018/1609–10 (both contain later insertions),²⁷ both divided into a muqaddimah (on the beliefs of the Hindus, their early rājahs and the coming of Islām to India), twelve maqālahs ((1) the g̲h̲aznawids of Lahore, (2) the Sulṭāns of Delhi, (3) the Deccan in six rauḍahs ((i) Bahmanids, (ii) ʿĀdil-S̲h̲āhs, (iii) Niẓām-S̲h̲āhs, (iv) Quṭb-S̲h̲āhs, (v) ʿImād-S̲h̲āhs, (vi) Barīdīs), (4) Gujrāt, (5) Mālwah, (6) Burhānpūr, (7) Bengal (including the S̲h̲arqīs of Jaunpūr), (8) Sind, Tattah and Multān, (9) the Samagān or Zamīndārs of Sind (the Jām and Arghūn dynasties and the Sulṭāns of Multān), (10) Kas̲h̲mīr, (11) Malabar, (12) Indian saints) and a k̲h̲ātimah (a short description of India): Ethé 296 (defective and damaged, ah 1042/1633), 291 (ah 1058/1648), 292 (ah 1141/1728–9 and 1163/1750), 293 (ah 1176/1762), 294 (Nauras-nāmah [?]. N.d.), 295 (apparently Nauras-nāmah. N.d.), 297–301 (five incomplete copies), Rieu i 226b–227a (defective, breaking off near the beginning of Maqālah xi (Malabar). 2 vols. in the same hand, the first dated ah 1048/1639), 225a (18th cent.), 227a (ah 1209/1795), 227a (Nauras-nāmah. Late 17th cent.), 227b (Nauras-nāmah. Lacunæ. 17th cent.), 227b (Nauras-nāmah. ad 1779), 228a (from Akbar to beginning of ¶ Rauḍah 6. 18th cent.), 228a (Maqālah iii only. 19th cent.), Lindesiana p. 141 nos. 378–9 (circ. ah 1079/1668–9), 826 (circ. ad 1760), 380 (“Parts i. ii. and iii. only.” Circ. ad 1810), Aumer 236 (Nauras-nāmah? ah 1087/1676–7), Blochet i 536 (late 17th cent.), 537–9 (lacuna, ah 1164/1750–1), 540 (fragments. 18th cent.), Berlin 465 (Nauras-nāmah. ah 114 = 1114/1703 [?]), 462–3 (ah 1212/1797–1214/1800), 464 (ah 1208/1793), 466 (defective at both ends and elsewhere), 467 (vol. i, defective), 468 (part of Maqālah iii only), Oxford Ind. Inst. ms. Pers. a.i. 9 (Muqaddimah and Maqālahs i–ii. ah 1139/1727), Leningrad Asiat. Mus. (ah 1146/1733. See Mélanges asiatiques iii (1859) p. 499. For another ms. see Mélanges asiatiques vi (1873) p. 124), r.a.s. P. 61 = Morley 48, P. 62 =Morley 49 (ah 1147/1734–5), P. 63 = Morley 50 (defective. ah 1159/1746), P. 64 = Morley 51 (Muqaddimah (part) and Maqālahs i–ii), P. 65 = Morley 52 (Muqaddimah and Maqālahs i–ii), Ivanow 138 (2nd half of Maqālah ii. ah 1147/1734–5), 135 (early 12th/18th cent.), 136 (late 12th/18th cent.), 137 (Maqālahs i–ii. 12th/18th cent.), 139 (Maqālah iv. Late 12th/18th cent.), Browne Pers. Cat. 82 (Maqālahs i–ii), 83 (vol. ii (i.e. Maqālah iii, Rauḍah 2 to the end of the work), ah 1152/1739–40), Suppt. 1100–2 (3 copies. Christ’s), 1103 (ah 1198/1783–4. King’s), Edinburgh 200 (vol. i. Not later than ah 1178/1764–5), Vollers 977, 978 (vol. i), 979 (vol. ii. ah 1246/1830–1), 980 (ah 1208/1793–4), Rehatsek p. 90 nos. 33–5 (ah 1222/1806–7), 36 (Muntak̲h̲ab az Tawārīk̲h̲ i Firis̲h̲tah (most of Maqālah iii apparently), ah 1243/1827), Bombay Univ. 17 (vol. i. ah 1256/1841), Āṣafīyah i p. 228 no. 704 (ah 1257/1841), iii p. 96 nos. 998, 1074, 1233 (the last dated ah 1160/1747), Bānkīpūr vii 538–9 (19th cent.), Bodleian 217 (Muqaddimah and Maqālahs i–ii), Caetani 71, Dresden 376 (vol. i).

Editions: Tārīk̲h̲ i Firis̲h̲tah, Bombay (and Poonah) 1831–2°*²⁸ (edited by Major-General J. Briggs and Mīr K̲h̲airāt ʿAlī K̲h̲ān “Mus̲h̲tāq”. Some of the copies have also an English title-page: Tarikh-i-Ferishta, or History of the rise of the Mahomedan power in India, till the year A.D. 1612, by Mahomed Kasim Ferishta … edited and collated from various manuscript copies … by Major-General J. Briggs … assisted by Mir Kheirat Ali Khan Mushtak), [Lucknow], Nawal Kishore, 1281/1864–5°, Cawnpore 1290/1874*, 1884*.

¶ Extracts: (1) [Maqālah xi (Malabar) with English translation by Anderson] The Asiatick Miscellany, vol. ii (Calcutta 1786) pp. 278–.²⁹ (2) Elliot Bibliographical index, Muntak̲h̲abāt, pp. 76–84.

English translation [somewhat abridged] of the whole work except Maqālah xii: History of the rise of the Mahomedan power in India, till the year A.D. 1612. Translated from the … Persian of Mahomed Kasim Ferishta, by J. Briggs. To which is added, an account of the conquest, by the Kings of Hydrabad, of those parts of the Madras Provinces denominated the Ceded Districts and Northern Circars. London 1829°*, Calcutta 1908–10°*.

Urdu translation by M. Fidā-ʿAlī “Ṭālib” (with a few brief notes by S. Hās̲h̲imī Farīdābādī): Ḥaidarābād 1926–32* (Osmania University Press. 4 vols., containing apparently the whole work except the lives of the saints. Only vol. i contains an index).

Translations of extracts: (1) [Maqālahs i and ii only] The history of Hindostan, from the earliest account of time to the death of Akbar; translated from the Persian of Mahummud Casim Ferishta … together with a dissertation concerning the religion and philosophy of the Brahmins. With an appendix containing the history of the Mogul Empire from its decline in the reign of Mahummud Shau to the present time. By A. Dow. 2 vols. London 1768°, 1770–2°* (2nd ed., enlarged. With a third volume containing The history of Hindostan from the death of Akbar to the … settlement of the empire under Aurungzebe [compiled from various writers] … A dissertation on the origin and nature of despotism in Hindostan … An enquiry into the state of Bengal … By A. Dow), 1792 (3rd ed. See Morley, p. 67, n. 4), 1803 (4th ed. See Morley ibid.), 1812* (“New edition”). (2) [Maqālah xi (Malabar)] see above under Extracts (1). (3) [Maqālah iii (the Deccan)] Ferishta’s History of Dekkan, from the first Mahummedan conquests: with a continuation from other native writers [or rather, from Bhīm Sēn’s Dil-kushā in abridged translation] of the events in that part of India to the reduction of its last monarchs by the Emperor Aulumgeer Aurungzebe; also, the reigns of his successors in the empire of Hindostan to the present day [translated from the Memoirs of Irādat K̲h̲ān and other works]: and the history of Bengal, from the accession of Aliverdee Khan to the year 1780 [translated as far as the death of ʿAlī-Wirdī K̲h̲ān “from a Persian manuscript” (see p. 563 infra) and thereafter from the Siyar al-mutaʾakhkhirīn of G̲h̲ulām-Ḥusain K̲h̲ān]. Comprised in six parts. [Translated] By Jonathan Scott. Shrewsbury 1794°*, London 1800 (2nd ed. See Morley p. 67, n. 6), London n.d. [?] (3 vols. 8vo. See Morley ibid.). (4) [Extracts from Briggs’s translation] ¶ Elliot Bibliographical index pp. 322–36. (5) [The same extracts] Elliot and Dowson History of India vi pp. 218–36. (6) [The Muqaddimah] Elliot and Dowson History of India vi pp. 532–69.

Descriptions: (1) J. Mohl in Journal des savants, 1840, pp. 212–26, 354–72, 392–403. (2) Elliot Bibliographical index pp. 310–39. (3) Elliot and Dowson History of India vi pp. 207–36. (4) Ency. Isl. under Firis̲h̲ta.

[Autobiographical statements in the Guls̲h̲an i Ibrāhīmī; Briggs’s translation, 1829 ed., vol. i pp. xxxix–xlvi (unsatisfactory, since there are no precise references to the translation, which, moreover, omits some of the author’s allusions to himself); J. Briggs Essay on the life and writings of Ferishta (in Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. ii (1830) pp. 341–61); J. Mohl in Journal des savants 1840 pp. 212–20 (contains references to the Bombay text); Elliot Bibliographical index pp. 310–13 (based on Briggs and Mohl); Elliot and Dowson History of India vi pp. 207–9 (a repetition of the preceding); Morley pp. 63–4; Rieu i 225; Bānkīpūr vii 538; Ency. Isl. under Firis̲h̲ta (some conjectures are stated here as facts. No precise references).]

§ 618. An anonymous author³⁰ compiled from Firis̲h̲tah and other histories a

Tārīk̲h̲ i rājahā (or ḥākimān) i Hind (beg. Dar muʿtaqadāt i ahl i Hind), a sketch of Indian history in twelve maqālahs corresponding to those of Firis̲h̲tah: Ethé 303 (ah 1149/1736), 304 (n.d.).

§ 619. M. S̲h̲arīf al-Najafī (Ḥanafī acc. to Elliot and Dowson) was born in the Deccan. In an official capacity he visited Gujrāt, Mālwah, Ajmēr, Delhi, Agra, the Panjāb, Sind, and Kas̲h̲mīr, the last in 1031/1621–2 in the train of Jahāngīr and under the command of Qāsim K̲h̲ān.

Majālis al-salāṭīn, a brief history of the kings of Delhi, the Deccan and Kas̲h̲mīr, completed ah 1038/1628–9: Rieu iii 906b (circ. ad 1850).

Extracts (chiefly on Kas̲h̲mīr) translated by a muns̲h̲ī: b.m. ms. Add. 30,779, foll. 92–102.

Description and 4 ½ pp. of translated extracts: Elliot and Dowson History of India vii 134–140.

§ 620. Banwālī or Banwālī-Dās “Walī”, who is sometimes called Walī Rām,³¹ was a muns̲h̲ī under S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s eldest son Dārā-S̲h̲ukōh and received instruction ¶ in Ṣūfism from Dārā-S̲h̲ukōh’s pīr, Mullā S̲h̲āh Badak̲h̲s̲h̲ī (for whom see p. 15 supra). His Mat̲h̲nawī in six wazns (beginning Qādirā az man manī bi-stān u bas. See Ivanow Curzon 270, 462 (27), Sprenger no. 564) was written, in part at least, in 1054–5/1644–5, and his Gulzār i ḥāl, a translation of the Sanskrit drama Prabōd’ha c̲h̲andrōdaya, in 1073/1662–3 (for mss. see Rieu iii 1043, Ethé 1995–6, Ross and Browne 195, Eton 157. Editions: Bombay 1862*, Lucknow 1877*, 1887°). According to the editor’s preface to the 1868 edition of his dīwān he died in 1085/1674–5.

An incomplete manuscript of his dīwān, containing g̲h̲azals, couplets, rubāʿīs and part of the above-mentioned Mat̲h̲nawī, is preserved at Calcutta (Ivanow Curzon 270). The Dīwān i Walī published at Lahore in 1868* contains only g̲h̲azals (beginning, as in Ivanow Curzon 270, Ganjī kih būd mak̲h̲fī aknūn s̲h̲ud ās̲h̲kārā) and two pages of rubāʿīs. According to the preface to that edition “Walī” wrote many works such as the Muḥīṭ i maʿrifat (a mat̲h̲nawī), the Gulzār i ḥāl, a Hindī dīwān and a Persian dīwān entitled Ganj i ʿirfān. The Mat̲h̲nawī i Walī Rām published at Lahore in 1867* by the same press as the aforementioned Dīwān i Walī and at Siyālkōṭ (though printed apparently at Gūjrānwālah) in [1876°*] seems to differ considerably from the mat̲h̲nawī described by Ivanow. It is divided into six jilds and begins Mā zi-kufr u dīn hamah bi-gd̲h̲as̲h̲tah īm. The third jild opens with the words given by Ivanow as the beginning of the third wazn. The King’s College ms. no. 14 (Browne Suppt. 1446) is described as “A collection of five Persian tracts on Hindu religion, etc., viz. (1) Kayán top-hí in verse; (2) Rám Gítá; (3) Miṣbáḥu ’l-Hudá; (4) Arjun Gítá; (5) Discussion between Dárá Shukúh and Bábá Lál, all by Walí Rám, except No. 4, which is by Abu ’l-faḍl”.

The Mat̲h̲nawī i Walī Rām maʿrūf bah C̲h̲as̲h̲mah i ʿirfān published at [Lucknow] in 1875°* and at Rāwalpindī in [1890°†] begins Ai s̲h̲udah mak̲h̲fī ba-kamāl i ẓuhūr and consists of only a few pages (ten in the Lucknow edition).

Rājāwalī,³² a short account of the Hindu rājahs of Delhi from Jud’his̲h̲tir to the invasion of S̲h̲ihāb (Muʿizz) al-Dīn M. b. Sām followed by a tabulated list of the subsequent Muslim rulers to S̲h̲āh-Jahān (usually with ¶ continuations to later rulers such as Muḥammad S̲h̲āh and ʿĀlamgīr ii): Berlin 14 (80) (earlier than ah 1154/1741–2),³³ Ethé 205 (n.d.), 206 (?) (late 18th cent.), Blochet i 551 (18th cent.), 552 (1) and (2) (two slightly different recensions. Late 18th cent.), Rieu ii 855a (ah 1208/1793), 916b (circ. ad 1850), 925a (ad 1849), Lindesiana p. 127 no. 451 (circ. ad 1840), Āṣafīyah i p. 240 nos. 519, 778, Bodleian 170 (n.d.), Browne Suppt. 644 (King’s 198), 1458 [?] (Corpus 115²), Leyden iv p. 223 no. 1968, Mehren p. 18 no. 47.

[Gul i raʿnā (Bānkīpūr viii p. 133); other sources mentioned above.]

§ 621. Rāy Bindrāban,³⁴ son of Rāy Bihārā-Mal,³⁵ was Dīwān to S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam Bahādur-S̲h̲āh for a time before his accession.³⁶

An inscription found at Elgandal Fort (in the Ḥaidarābād State) seems to show that he was at one time Governor of that fort, “an important outpost on the north-east frontier of the Quṭb-S̲h̲āhī kingdom” (see Annual report of the Director-General of Archaeology in India, 1920–1, p. 39). During the siege of Bījāpūr in 1095/1684 he was dismissed from the army by Aurangzēb on the ground that he was implicated in S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam’s secret communication with the enemy (see K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān ii p. 321).

Lubb al-tawārīk̲h̲ i Hind, or, as in some mss., Lubb al-tawārīk̲h̲ simply, a concise history of India from S̲h̲ihāb al-Dīn (Muʿizz al-Dīn) M. b. Sām (ah 572/1176–7) to ah 1101/1689–90, abridged mainly from Firis̲h̲tah as far as ah 1000/1591–2, in ten faṣls ((1) Delhi, (2) The Deccan, (3) Gujrāt, (4) Mālwah, (5) K̲h̲āndēs̲h̲, (6) Bengal, (7) Jaunpūr, (8) Sind, (9) Multān, (10) Kas̲h̲mīr): Rieu i 228b (late 17th cent.), 229b (ah 1119/1707), 229b (ah 1149/1737), 229b (18th cent.), 229b (19th cent.), iii 907b (ah 1196/1782), 907b (extracts), 965b (extracts. Circ. ad 1850), Ethé 358 (ah 1110/1698), 359 (ah 1131/1719), 360 (ah 1156/1743), 361 (extract), i.o. D.P. 715 (ah 1148/1735), Mehren 48 (ah 1144/1731), Blochet i 543 (late 18th cent.), Ivanow 161 (late 18th cent.), Lindesiana p. 127 no. 430 (circ. ad 1820), Āṣafīyah iii p. 108 no. 1067 (date given as ah 1019 [!]), Bodleian 245 (defective at both ends), ¶ Eton 176, Lahore Panjab Univ. Lib. (see Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926) p. 46).

Description and 2 ½ pp. of translated extracts: Elliot and Dowson History of India vii 168–73.

§ 622. Muns̲h̲ī³⁷ Sujān³⁸ Rāy Bhandārī,³⁹ or Sujān Sing’h D’hīr,⁴⁰ whose name is mentioned in the text of some mss.⁴¹ of the K̲h̲ulāṣat al-tawārīk̲h̲ and in some of the copyists’ colophons, tells us that he was born at Baṭālah⁴² (K̲h̲. al-t. p. 71²⁰) and that from his youth up he had been a muns̲h̲ī in the employ of officials (K̲h̲. al-t., preface). In the colophons of the b.m. ms. Add. 5559 (cf. Rieu i p. 230a) and the i.o. ms. 637a it is said that he was well-versed in the Hindī, Persian and Sanskrit ʿulūm. The latter colophon (perhaps also the former) says that he was nādir al-ʿaṣr wa-’l-daurān in calligraphy, muns̲h̲īgarī and ba-hamah ṣifat (!). Another work of his, the K̲h̲ulāṣat al-ins̲h̲āʾ, was completed, according to Rieu, in ʿĀlamgīr’s 35th year, ah 1102–3 (cf. n. 4 on this page, where the date is given as 1105, perhaps by a misprint). Extracts from it are preserved in the British Museum (see Rieu iii p. 1017a). The K̲h̲ulāṣat al-makātīb, “a rich collection of specimens of refined prose-style intermixed with verses, on all possible topics, by Sujân Singh or Sujân Râi Munshî of Patyâla [sic]” (Ethé 2109), was written in ʿĀlamgīr’s 42nd year, ah 1110 (see Oriental College Magazine, vol. x no. 4 (Lahore, August 1934) pp. 66–7).

K̲h̲ulāṣat al-tawārīk̲h̲, written in two years and completed in 1107/1695–6, Aurangzēb’s fortieth regnal year, a history of India from the earliest ¶ times to Aurangzēb’s accession:⁴³ r.a.s. P. 66 = Morley 53 (probably copied from a ms. written in 1130/1717), P. 67 = Morley 54 (ah 1223/1808), P. 68 = Morley 55 (ah 1239/1823), Ivanow 162 (ah 1140/1728), 163 (late 12th cent, h.), Curzon 32 (1194 Faṣlī/1787), 33 (defective at both ends. Early 19th cent.), Bodleian 2354 (to end of Hindu Rājahs only. ah 1150/1737), 246 (ad 1816), ms. Pers. d. 28 (“recent”), Rieu iii 907b (ah 1161/1748), 907b (circ. ad 1850), 908a (to Buhlūl Lōdī only. ah 1237/1821), i 230a (ah 1188/1774), 231a (ah 1164/1751), 231a (ad 1767), 231b (late 18th cent.), iii 1014b etc. (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), Lindesiana p. 217 no. 159 (circ. ad 1750), no. 122 (ah 1215/1800–1), no. 371 (circ. ad 1800), no. 821 (ah 1229/1814), Edinburgh 201 (ah 1175/1761), Blochet i 544 (ah 1180/1766–7), 545 (ah 1182/1768–9), 546 (with another preface containing the title Tad̲h̲kirat al-salāṭīn(?). Defective at end. 18th cent.), 547 (late 18th cent.), 548 (late 18th cent.), Aumer 237 (n.d.), 238 (Akbar to Aurangzēb only. ad 1792), Ethé 362 (ah 1216/1802), 363 (ad 1854), 364 (fragment only, to end of Hindu Rājahs. N.d.), ii 3012 (18th cent.), i.o. D.P. 637a (18th cent.), Calcutta Madrasah 128 (defective. Circ. ad 1800), Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (4 copies dated ah 1224/1809–10 etc. three of them containing a continuation, Ḍamīmah i K̲h̲. al-t., by Jai Kis̲h̲an Dās Mihrah, dealing with Aurangzēb’s reign and one an anonymous further continuation from Aurangzēb’s death to ah 1158/1745. See Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii, no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926) pp. 46–8), ʿAlīgaṛh Subḥ. mss. p. 58 no. 954 (10) (ah 1226/1811), Berlin 472 (ah 1227/1812), Bānkīpūr vii 540 (ah 1234/1819), Suppt. 1762 (ah 1231/1816), Vollers 984, 985 (ad 1842), Āṣafīyah i p. 238 nos. 515 and 648, iii p. 102 no. 1062 (ah 1263/1847), Browne Pers. Cat. 84 (breaks off in the history of Multān, which is inserted in Babur’s reign), Suppt. 436 (King’s 156), Madras 128, Rosen Institut 16 (breaks off in Humāyūn’s reign), Upsala Zetterstéen 401.

Edition: The Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh by Sujan Rai Bhandari edited by M. Zafar Hasan …, Delhi 1918* (540 pp.). The editions of the Muqaddimah to the Siyar al-mutaʾakhkhirīn (for which see p. 501 infra) can also be regarded as editions of the K̲h̲ulāṣat al-tawārīk̲h̲.

Translation of the topographical and statistical account of the ṣūbahs (omitting the last, Kābul): The India of Aurangzib (topography, statistics, and roads) compared with the India of Akbar with extracts from the ¶ Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh and the Chahar Gulshan translated and annotated by Jadunath Sarkar, Calcutta 1901°*, pp. 1–122 [corresponding to pp. 28–83 in Ẓafar Ḥasan’s edition].

Descriptions: (1) Elliot and Dowson History of India viii pp. 5–12 (including a translation of the account of Delhi, 1 ½ pp.), (2) The k̲h̲aláṣat [sic]-at-Tawáríkh, or Essence of History; being the description and history of India as told by a Hindu two hundred years ago. By H. Beveridge (in jras. 1894 pp. 733–68), (3) The India of Aurangzib … by Jadunath Sarkar, Calcutta 1901, pp. xi–xv.

Free Urdu translation (or, in places, adaptation⁴⁴) of the earlier part (less than one-third of the whole), which deals mainly with the geography of India and the Hindu Rājahs of Delhi:⁴⁵ Ārāyis̲h̲ i maḥfil begun in 1219/1804 and completed in 1220/1805 by Mīr S̲h̲ēr ʿAlī “Afsōs” Jaʿfarī b. S. ʿAlī Muẓaffar K̲h̲ān, an Urdu poet, who was Head Muns̲h̲ī in the Hindustani department at the College of Fort William, and who died at Calcutta in 1809 (see Sprenger p. 198, Saksena History of Urdu literature pp. 244–5): i.o. 2048 = Blumhardt 39 (a ms. from the College of Fort William which does not contain “Afsōs’s” preface and introduction).

Editions of the Ārāyis̲h̲ i maḥfil: Calcutta 1808°*, 1848°*, 1863°, Lahore 1867*, Lucknow 1870*.

English translation: The Araish-i-Mahfil; or, The ornament of the assembly, literally translated from the Oordoo by Major⁴⁶ Henry Court …, Allahabad 1871°*, Calcutta 1882°*.

Extracts from the Ārāyis̲h̲ i maḥfil: (1) [The general description of India, its spring and rainy season, fruits, flowers, animals, Hindu learning, ascetics, army, women] Muntakhabāt-i-Hindī, or Selections in Hindustani … By John Shakespear … vol. i (London 1817°*) pp. 79–134, (2) [The description of the ṣūbahs] ibid. vol. ii (London 1818°*) pp. 3–188.

Translations of extracts from the Ārāyis̲h̲ i maḥfil (1) [The Hindu “sciences” (French)] Quelques lignes sur les sciences des Indiens, extraites de l’ Araïch-i-mahfil … et traduites de l’hindostani par M. [J.H.S.V.] Garcin de Tassy (in the Journal asiatique [1st series] tome ix (Paris 1826*) pp. 97–115). (2) [On the fruits and flowers of India (French)] Quelques lignes sur les fruits et les fleurs de l’Hindostan, extraites de l’Araïch ï Mahfil ou Statistique ¶ et histoire de l’Hindostan, … et traduites …, par M. Garcin de Tassy (in the Journal asiatique [1st series] tome xi (Paris 1827*) pp. 94–105). (3) [Most of the general description of India, its spring and rainy season, elephants, carriages and palanquins, inhabitants, army, women, and of the geographical description of the ṣūbahs (French)] Histoire de la littérature hindoui [so] et hindoustani [so] par M. [J.H.S.V.] Garcin de Tassy [First edition], tome ii (Paris 1847°*) pp. 310–411. (4) [Most of the general description of India, its spring and rainy season, carriages and palanquins, inhabitants, army, women (but not the description of the ṣūbahs, which is now omitted)] Histoire de la littérature hindouie et hindoustanie par M. [J.H.S.V.] Garcin de Tassy … seconde édition, tome i (Paris 1870°*) pp. 125–36. (5) [History of the Pāndavas (French)] Histoire du règne des Pandavas dans l’Hindoustan, traduite du texte hindoustani de l’Araïch-i Mahfil … par M. l’abbé [François Marie] Bertrand (in the Journal asiatique, 3^e série, tome xiv (Paris 1842°*) pp. 71–107. (6) [The Hindu Rājahs from Parīks̲h̲it to the Muslim conquest (French)] Histoire des rois de l’Hindoustan après les Pandavas, traduite … par M. l’abbé [F.M.] Bertrand (in the Journal asiatique, 4^e série, tome iii (Paris 1844*°) pp. 104–23, 229–57, 354–77. (7) [Ten of the fourteen chapters or sections contained in Shakespear’s Muntakhabāt-i-Hindī, vol. i (only), those on the fruits, flowers, crocodile, etc., Hindu sciences and women being omitted] Ārāyis̲h̲ i maḥfil [these words printed in the Arabic character] or Assemblage of ornament. Ten sections of a description of India, being the most interesting portion of J. Shakespear’s Muntak̲h̲abāt-i-Hindī … Translated … and accompanied with notes, explanatory and grammatical, by N.L. Benmohel, Dublin 1847°.

Descriptions of the Ārāyis̲h̲ i maḥfil: (1) Histoire de la littérature hindoui et hindoustani par M. Garcin de Tassy, [first edition], tome i (Paris 1839*), pp. 31–2, seconde éd., tome i (Paris 1870*) pp. 124–5, (2) Elliot and Dowson History of India viii pp. 6–7, (3) H. Beveridge k̲h̲aláṣat-[sic] at-Tawáríkh … (in jras. 1894) pp. 734, 747–8, 750–2.

[K̲h̲ulāṣat al-tawārīk̲h̲ pp. 6^11–12 (for many years muns̲h̲ī to officials), 71²⁰ (Baṭālah his birthplace), 86 penult, (saw certain women in the neighbourhood of Kābul), 35¹⁶ (visit to the gardens at Pinjaur); colophons of certain mss.; H. Beveridge The k̲h̲aláṣat-[sic] at-Tawáríkh … (in jras. 1894) pp. 737, 763–4; Jadunath Sarkar The India of Aurangzib, Calcutta 1901, p. xi; Ency. Isl. under Sandjān [sic] Rāy (M. S̲h̲afīʿ).]

§ 623. Jagjīwan Dās, son of Manōhar Dās, Gujrātī entered the Imperial service as harkārah in 1105/1693–4 and from that time kept a record of current events. In 1119/1707–8 he received a k̲h̲ilʿat from Bahādur S̲h̲āh at Lahore, where he had been for two years in the Intelligence Department.

¶ Muntak̲h̲ab al-tawārīk̲h̲,⁴⁷ a sketch of Indian history written in 1120/1708–9 and, apart from the chapter dealing with Bahādur S̲h̲āh, based apparently on the Lubb al-tawārīk̲h̲ of Bindrāban (see p. 356 supra): Rieu i 232a (ah 1144/1731), 231b (ah 1257/1842), Oxford Ind. Inst. ms. Pers. A. iv 23 (ah 1231/1816, said to have been transcribed from a fair copy of the author’s dated ah 1131/1719), i.o. 4517 (ah 1240/1825).

[Muntak̲h̲ab al-tawārīk̲h̲, preface (cf. Rieu i pp. 2316–232a).]

§ 624. The year 1118/1706–7 is twice mentioned as the current year in a

Dastūr al-ʿamal beginning Fihrist i tawārīk̲h̲ i Rājahā i Dihlī wa-g̲h̲airah and containing chronological records down to Farruk̲h̲siyar’s 2nd year, ah 1126/1714, with lists of S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s and Aurangzēb’s amīrs, their titles etc.: Ivanow 381 (ah 1271/1854–5), Rieu iii 989b (transcribed from the preceding ms.).

§ 625. M. Hādī, a convert from Hinduism, entered the imperial service in Aurangzēb’s time. In the second year of Bahādur S̲h̲āh’s reign he received the title of Kāmwar K̲h̲ān at the recommendation of Prince Rafīʿ al-S̲h̲ān, Bahādur S̲h̲āh’s second son, and was appointed Mīr-Sāmān to Rafīʿ al-S̲h̲ān’s third son, M. Ibrāhīm. He is the author of a history of the Indian Tīmūrids brought down to ah 1137/1724–5 and entitled Tad̲h̲kirat al-salāṭīn i C̲h̲ag̲h̲atā (see p. 407 infra).

Haft guls̲h̲an i Muḥammad-S̲h̲āhī (or Haft guls̲h̲an i Ilāhī, as the author calls the work in the preface to his Tad̲h̲kirat al-salāṭīn i C̲h̲ag̲h̲atā), a general history of India to ah 1132/1719–20 divided into seven guls̲h̲ans ((1) Delhi to the time of Bābur, Jaunpūr, Mālwah, (2) Gujrāt, K̲h̲āndēs̲h̲, (3) Bengal, (4) the Deccan, (5) Sind, Multān, (6) Kas̲h̲mir, (7) Indian saints) and based mainly on Firis̲h̲tah and Bindrāban’s Lubb al-tawārīk̲h̲ (see p. 356 supra): Ethé 394 (a later edition finished in 1136/1723. Autograph), Lindesiana p. 169 no. 871 (ah 1207–6/1792–1 (so)), Berlin 494 (ah 1209/1794), Edinburgh 202 (lacks Guls̲h̲an vii. Late 18th cent.), Rieu iii 908a (18th cent.), Bānkīpūr vii 541 (19th cent.).

English translation of some extracts by Sadāsuk’h Lāl: B.M. ms. Add. 30,782 foll. 3–60.

Description: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii pp. 13–16 (with a translated extract of 1 page).

[Haft guls̲h̲an, preface (see Rieu iii 908a, Elliot and Dowson viii pp. 13–14), Tad̲h̲kirat al-salāṭīn i C̲h̲ag̲h̲atā, vol. ii (in the account of Bahādur S̲h̲āh’s reign. See Bānkīpūr vii p. 15, where the words are quoted): M. Bak̲h̲s̲h̲ “Ās̲h̲ōb” Life ¶ of Muḥammad S̲h̲āh (Rieu iii 943–5) fol. 44 (cf. Rieu iii 945a), where Kāmwar K̲h̲ān is said to have been originally a Hindu named C̲h̲andīdās.]

§ 626. ʿAbd Allāh “Yaqīn”, a descendant of Mīr S̲h̲āh Manṣūr Barlās, and consequently described in the Safīnah i K̲h̲wus̲h̲gū as a Mug̲h̲ul of Tūrānī origin, is said to have lived the life of a darwīs̲h̲ and to have spent his time in the coffee-shops of S̲h̲āh-jahānābād (see the Bānkīpūr catalogue viii p. 106). According to the same authority he wrote a dīwān.

Tārīk̲h̲ i T̲h̲ābit, a metrical history of the Muḥammadan dynasties of India written in 1133/1720–1, in the reign of Muḥammad S̲h̲āh, at the suggestion of T̲h̲ābit-Qadam K̲h̲ān: Blochet iii 1928 (12th regnal year [of M. S̲h̲āh ? ah 1142/1729–30]), i.o. D.P. 614 (18th year of M. S̲h̲āh [ah 1149/1736]), Rieu ii 824b (28th year of M. S̲h̲āh [ah 1158/1745]).

[Autobiographical statements at the end of the Tārīk̲h̲ i T̲h̲ābit; Hamīs̲h̲ah bahār (Sprenger p. 130); Safīnah i K̲h̲wus̲h̲gū (Bānkīpūr viii p. 106).]

§ 627. M. Hās̲h̲im K̲h̲āfī⁴⁸ (M. al-l. iii p. 2³) entitled (muk̲h̲ātab bi-) Hās̲h̲im ʿAlī K̲h̲ān (M. al-l. i p. 2¹) and afterwards K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān Niẓām-al-Mulkī (M. al-l. i p. 2¹, iii p. 2^3–4) was the son of an official⁴⁹ in the service of Prince Murād-Bak̲h̲s̲h̲, S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s youngest son.⁵⁰

¶ He makes no precise statement concerning the date of his birth, but in one passage (M. al-l. i p. 739) he mentions that at the time of writing (li-g̲h̲āyat i ḥāl) seventy-four years had passed since the death of Saʿd Allāh K̲h̲ān (Jumādā ii ah 1066/April 1656) and fifty-two since he himself had reached the age of discretion (ḥadd i tamīz).⁵¹ H. Beveridge in the Ency. Isl. assumes (with a query) that the age of discretion was fourteen years and infers, doubtless with substantial correctness, that K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān was born about ah 1074 (i.e. 1140–66).

The place of his birth is unknown, but his connexion with the Deccan dates at least from an early period in his life. Thus he tells us (M. al-l. ii p. 555^18–19) that he attended the funeral of the saint Sh. Burhān⁵² [Burhānpūrī], who died according to him⁵³ in the 22nd year of Aurangzēb’s reign [i.e. ah 1089/1678]. With another saint of Burhānpūr, Mīr Naṣīr al-Dīn Harawī, he was in close relation as a disciple (M. al-l. ii p. 558 penult.). His teacher (ustād) was a certain Mīr Saiyid Muḥammad, whom he describes as a well-known scholar and an incomparable mathematician (riyāḍī-dān) contemporary with Jahāngīr (M. al-l. i p. 308), but it is not clear who this person was or where he lived.

He was attached⁵⁴ to the unsuccessful expedition sent by Aurangzēb [in 1093/1682] under the command of S̲h̲ihāb al-Dīn K̲h̲ān against the fort of Rāmsēj⁵⁵ (M. al-l. ii p. 282¹¹). In the days when Aurangzēb was resident in the Deccan,⁵⁶ K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān noticed that from the year 1097/1685–6 onwards the Deccan was free from any sign of pestilence (wabā. M. al-l. i p. 287^16–18).

¶ For a time he was residing with ʿAbd al-Razzāq K̲h̲ān Lārī⁵⁷ in a house adjacent to the fort built by S̲h̲ivājī at Rāhīrī⁵⁸ (M. al-l. ii p. 390^7–9 = E. & D. vii p. 341). This must have been within the period 1103–6/1691–5 (or thereabouts), since ʿAbd al-Razzāq K̲h̲ān was appointed Faujdār of Rāhīrī in (or soon after) the former year (M. al-l. ii p. 405) and removed from that post in the latter (M. al-l. ii p. 449).

In 1105/1693–4 K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān went to Sūrat as ʿAbd al-Razzāq K̲h̲ān Lārī’s authorised agent in order to convey from that port to Rāhīrī property worth nearly two lakhs of rupees. On his way back he received and accepted an invitation to visit an English acquaintance of ʿAbd al-Razzāq K̲h̲ān’s at Bombay. His interesting account of that visit to Bombay (M. al-l. ii pp. 424–7) is one of the passages translated by Dowson (E. & D. vii pp. 351–4).

This was not his only visit to Sūrat. At the time when he wrote his history he had been there repeatedly (mukarrar, M. al-l. i p. 469. Cf. ii p. 441), and once (in 1106/1694–5 apparently) he was present at a banquet given by Amānat K̲h̲ān K̲h̲wāfī,⁵⁹ the Mutaṣaddī of the town, to S̲h̲. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Muftī on his return from a pilgrimage to the Ḥijāz (M. al-l. ii p. 444). Another place with which he was connected was Baglānah,⁶⁰ in which he spent two years at some unspecified time (M. al-l. i p. 562).

A few days after Aurangzēb’s death he was in the company of M. Murād K̲h̲ān (see p. 367 infra), who at that time was Wāqiʿah-Nigār and Sawāniḥ-Nigār ¶ of the province of Aḥmadābād and also Faujdār of the sarkār of T’hāsrah⁶¹ and Gōdrah.⁶² It must have been about this time that he was brought into contact with the leader of an Ismāʿīlī sect at Aḥmadābād in connexion with the release of some prominent members of the sect who had been imprisoned by order of Aurangzēb.⁶³ It was than that he obtained some Ismāʿīlī law-books with a view to investigating the names Ismāʿīlīyah and c̲h̲irāg̲h̲-kus̲h̲, by which the sect was known.

He was present on the battlefield near Ḥaidarābād where Prince Kām-Bak̲h̲s̲h̲ was defeated on the 3rd of D̲h̲ū ’l-Qa‘dah 1120/13 January 1709⁶⁴ by Bahādur S̲h̲āh’s forces (M. al-l. ii p. 624¹⁰). In the early part of that Emperor’s reign he was Qalʿah-dār at C̲̲h̲ānpānēr⁶⁵ in Gujrāt (M. al-t. i p. 77).

In 1121/1709–10 (having recently arrived in Aḥmadābād⁶⁶) he was appointed by G̲h̲āzī al-Dīn K̲h̲ān Fīrōz-Jang, the Governor (Ṣūbah-dār) of the province of Aḥmadābād, to be Dīwān and Mihmāndār⁶⁷ to a distinguished visitor, ¶ Mīrzā M. Hās̲h̲im,⁶⁸ who had come, presumably from Persia, via Sūrat [to Aḥmadābād] on his way to Bahādur S̲h̲āh’s court at Delhi.

At the beginning of Farruk̲h̲-siyar’s reign (ah 1124 or 1125/1713) Qilīc̲h̲ K̲h̲ān received the title of Niẓām al-Mulk Bahādur Fatḥ-Jang and the Governorship (ṣūbah-dārī) of the Deccan. Apparently at this time he appointed K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān to be his Dīwān.⁶⁹ In the following year, however, S. Ḥusain ʿAlī K̲h̲ān became Governor of the Deccan, and Niẓām al-Mulk returned to Delhi. K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān next tells us (M. al-l. ii p. 798) in his account of the year 1131/1718–19 that after three distressful years he was appointed Amīn and Faujdār of the estates (maḥāll) of Muṣtafā-ābād,⁷⁰ which belonged to the Royal domains. From this new appointment he was dismissed after only a very short time by S. Ḥusain ʿAlī K̲h̲ān, who took him with him⁷¹ on his march to Delhi [in 1131/1719].

In Ramaḍān 1132/1720 he rode through Delhi to see the damage caused by an earthquake (M. al-l. ii p. 883^{9 seq}). According to Beveridge (Ency. Isl. under K̲h̲^wāfī K̲h̲ān) it was Muḥammad S̲h̲āh who conferred upon him the title K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān. No statement to this effect seems to occur in the printed text of the Muntak̲h̲ab al-lubāb.

In a Persian note at the end of the British Museum ms. Add. 26,224 (a copy of vol. ii) it is stated (according to Rieu i p. 232b) that the author had written four or five leaves further when he died (probably therefore in, or not long after, 1144/1731–2).

More than once in the Muntak̲h̲ab al-lubāb he takes occasion to reflect on the evil consequences of oppression (ẓulm, mardum-āzārī) not only to the oppressor but to his descendants (the sins of the fathers being visited upon the children), and in one passage (ii pp. 676–7) he claims that he himself never stooped to such conduct. Even at a time when peculation was rife in the Deccan of Aurangzēb’s days he took care that matters should not go so far as to cause ¶ accusations of oppression. In or soon after Aurangzēb’s 32nd year there did indeed occur a regrettable incident, of which he declines to give particulars, but thereafter he strove whole-heartedly—but with incomplete success—to avoid imputations of financial irregularity.⁷²

He was on friendly terms with his much younger⁷³ contemporary and fellow-K̲h̲wāfī, Ṣamṣām al-Daulah S̲h̲āh-Nawāz K̲h̲ān, the author of the Maʾāt̲h̲ir al-umarāʾ.⁷⁴ Another friend and at one time a colleague of his was his kinsman (birādarī) M. Murād K̲h̲ān (for a time entitled Saʿādat K̲h̲ān), who for two or three years was Aurangzēb’s Ḥājib at Ḥaidarābād,⁷⁵ and who died in 1120 (according to M. al-l. ii p. 661) or in 1122 (according to the Maʾāt̲h̲ir al-umarāʾ iii 687).

In a preamble which occurs in the b.m. ms. Or. 176 (latter part of vol. ii, Aurangzēb and his successors) but not in the printed text and which is summarised by Rieu (i p. 234b), K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān describes himself as having been successively attached to the train of three or four sovereigns and says that he had spent sixteen or seventeen years of his life on the composition of the ¶ Muntak̲h̲ab al-lubāb, especially on the last forty years of Aurangzēb’s reign. Of that period, owing to Aurangzēb’s prohibition of historical writing, he had found no previous record⁷⁶ except Mustaʿidd K̲h̲ān’s account of the Deccan conquests, but he had tried to compile a truthful narrative from the official records, the reports of trustworthy persons and his personal experiences.

Muntak̲h̲ab al-lubāb, a history of India from the Muḥammadan conquest “to the beginning of Muḥammad S̲h̲āh’s 14th year”, ah 1144/1731,⁷⁷ divided into three volumes ((1) perhaps never completed except in the rough,⁷⁸ from the Muḥammadan conquest to the end of the Lōdī dynasty, (2) the Tīmūrids to Muḥammad S̲h̲āh,⁷⁹ the detailed narrative closing with ah 1137/1724⁸⁰ and being followed by a chapter on events, especially in Persia, from the eighth to the thirteenth year of Muḥammad S̲h̲āh, (3) the local dynasties (“the kings of the various ṣūbahs of India, with the exception of those of Delhi and Akbarābād”) abridged from Firis̲h̲tah, Nūr al-Ḥaqq and others but perhaps never continued beyond the Deccan dynasties⁸¹): Ivanow 173 (very defective, but apparently old. ah 1146/1733–4 (?)), 169 (vol. ii only. ah 1191/1777), 170 (vol. ii, defective. Late 18th cent.), 171 (vol. ii. Late 18th cent.), 172 (vol. ii, pt. 2 (from ¶ Aurangzēb’s 32nd year), ah 1194/1780), 1st Suppt. 763 (Vol. iii (not vol. i as stated in the catalogue). Deccan dynasties only. Urdībihis̲h̲t 1313 Ilāhī (sic, but the Ilāhī era, which starts in 963/1556, has not yet reached 1313)), Rieu i 232b (vol. ii. ah 1196/1782), 234a (vol. ii. ad 1821), 234a (vol. ii, part = Calcutta ed. i p. 1–ii p. 177. 18th cent.), 234a (vol. ii, part=Calcutta ed. i p. 2–ii p. 127. 18th cent.), 234a (vol. ii, part = Calcutta ed. ii pp. 492–978. ah 1224/1809), 234b (vol. ii, part = pt. ii of the Calcutta ed. ad 1823), 234b (Vol. i, part (the Lōdīs) and vol. ii, part (Bābur to Aurangzēb’s tenth year, but lacking the later part of Akbar’s reign and the whole of Jahāngīr’s). 18th cent.), 235b (Vol. iii, first part (the Deccan dynasties), ah 1237/1822), iii 1049b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), Lindesiana p. 175 no. 822 (circ. ad 1780), Ethé 396 (vol. ii. Late 18th cent.), 397 (vol. ii. ah 1225/1810), 398 (vol. ii. ah 1239/1823), 399 (vol. ii. Modern), 400–1 (vol. ii. N.d.), 402 (vol. ii, part of 2nd half (Aurangzēb’s 4th year to accession of Farruk̲h̲-siyar). N.d.), 403 (vol. ii, part (Farruk̲h̲-siyar to M. S̲h̲āh)), 404 (vol. ii, extracts from 1st half. ad 1806), 405 (vol. ii, selections), 406 (vol. ii, extracts), 407 (Vol. iii, small portion (86 folls. Bahmanīs to Niẓām S̲h̲āh (d. 867/1463)), ii 3013 (vol. ii, defective), i.o. 3936 (Aʿzam S̲h̲āh to the end), Blochet i 549 (vol. ii. 18th cent.), Caetani 2 (belonged to Jonathan Scott), Āṣafīyah i p. 254 no. 216 (Vol. iii), no. 403 (Vol. iii. ah 1204/1789–90), iii p. 92 nos. 1367 (an abridgment of Vol. iii ?), 1172 (an abridgment of Vol. iii. ah 1269/1851–3), Rehatsek p. 91 no. 37 (“all the four volumes” [sic], ah 1207/1793), no. 38 (an abridgment?. N.d.), Brelvi & Dhabhar p. 63 no. 4 (Vol. iii. ah 1214/1799–1800), Bodleian 259 (vol. ii, extending to M. S̲h̲āh’s 3rd year = 1133/1720–1), 260 (vol. ii), 261 (vol. ii. ad 1842), Oxford Ind. Inst. ms. Pers. A. i 24–7 (“recent”), r.a.s. P. 102–3 = Morley 98–9 (vol. ii, to Aurangzēb’s death), Browne Suppt. 1253 (vol. ii, part (Aurangzēb’s reign). N.d.), 1254 (vol. ii, part (from Aurangzēb’s 11th year). ah 1237/1821–2, copied from an original dated ah 1183/1769–70), Browne Coll. H. 15 (13) (Vol. iii, part (105 foll, only)), Bānkīpūr vii 592 (vol. ii. 19th cent.), Berlin 435 (vol. ii, extending to M. S̲h̲āh’s 3rd year, ah 1133/1720–1), Majlis 275.

Edition: (1) (of vol. ii⁸² only): The Muntakhab al-lubáb of Kháfí Khán. Edited by Maulaví Kabír al-Dín Aḥmed [and Ghulám Qádir], 2 pts. Calcutta 1860–74°* (Bibliotheca Indica). (2) (of vol. iii (Deccan dynasties only)): Muntakhab-al-lubāb by Khāfi Khān … volume iii. Edited by Sir Wolseley Haig. Calcutta 1909–25* (Bibliotheca Indica).

Translations of extracts: (1) [by W. Erskine, dated 1811] an extract extending from S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s accession to ah 1067/1656–7: b.m. ms. ¶ Add. 26,613–14. (2) [by W. Erskine] a transcript of the preceding, with another extract [also translated by Erskine?] extending from ah 1070/1659–60 to ah 1130/1718: b.m. ms. Add. 26,615–16. (3) [by Captain A. Gordon, dated Nāgpūr 1821] an extract extending from the beginning of vol. ii to Mahābat K̲h̲ān’s capture of Jahāngīr: b.m. ms. Add. 26,617 and (another copy) 26,618–19. (4) [by J. Dowson] extracts nearly all relating to Aurangzēb: Elliot and Dowson History of India vii pp. 211–533.

Descriptions: (1) W. Nassau Lees Materials for the history of India for the six hundred years of Mohammadan rule (in jras. 1868 pp. 414–77) pp. 465–9, (2) Elliot and Dowson History of India vii pp. 207–10.

[Autobiographical statements (nearly all of these are referred to above); Elliot and Dowson History of India vii pp. 207–9; Rieu i 232b, 234b, 235b; Ency. Isl. under K̲h̲^wāfī K̲h̲ān (Beveridge).]

§ 628. Lāl Rām, son of Rāy Dūlah Rām b. Rāy Kunjaman K̲h̲uld-Makānī, once held Mūngī Patan, in the Deccan, as a jāgīr (T. al-H. fol. 22a). He was in the service of Muḥammad S̲h̲āh and wrote his Tuḥfat al-Hind in the 18th year of that sovereign’s reign, ah 1148/1735–6.

Tuḥfat al-Hind, a history and topography of India to the time of Farruk̲h̲-siyar (reigned 1124/1713–1131/1719) in four sections (faṣl), the third containing an account of the early kings of Persia and the Greek philosophers, the fourth miscellaneous historical anecdotes, and a k̲h̲ātimah: Edinburgh 203 (ah 1182/1768), Rieu i 236 (lacking k̲h̲ātimah. 18th cent.).

§ 629. Yaḥyā K̲h̲ān was Mīr Muns̲h̲ī to the Emperor Farruk̲h̲-siyar (reigned 1124/1713–1131/1719).

Tad̲h̲kirat al-mulūk, a general history of India to ah 1149/1736–7, based chiefly on the Ṭabaqāt i Akbarī (see p. 341 supra): Ethé 409 (ah 1212/1797).

§ 630. Rustam ʿAlī b. M. K̲h̲alīl S̲h̲āhābādī was serving in the army of Bājī Rāō at the taking of Mālwah in 1150/1737–8. He then went to Bhōpāl and lived under the patronage of the Nawwāb Yār-Muḥammad K̲h̲ān.

Tārīk̲h̲ i Hindī, a general history of India to ah 1153/1740–1, completed in 1154/1741–2, and divided into a muqaddimah, ten ṭabaqahs and a k̲h̲ātimah (on contemporary or nearly contemp. s̲h̲aik̲h̲s, ʿulamāʾ and poets), much space being devoted to Muḥammad S̲h̲āh:⁸³ Rieu iii 909a (ah 1264/1848), 1057b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850).

¶ Translated extracts: b.m. ms. Add. 30,780 foll. 118–160.

Description and 27 pp. of translated extracts (on M. S̲h̲āh’s reign): Elliot and Dowson History of India viii 40–69.

§ 631. Rāy C̲h̲aturman⁸⁴ Kāyat’h⁸⁵ Saksēnah,⁸⁶ surnamed Rāy-zādah, (Rāy c̲h̲aturman, qaum Kāyat’h Saksēnah, laqab Rāy-zādah, as he calls himself in the preface) completed his C̲h̲ahār guls̲h̲an in 1173/1759–60, a date which he indicates by a metrical chronogram.⁸⁷ According to the colophon of his grandson (nabīrah), the redactor, which occurs in most of the manuscripts, the author died one week after finishing the work.

C̲h̲ahār guls̲h̲an, or Ak̲h̲bār al-nawādir, a history and topography of India to ah 1173/1759–60 in four guls̲h̲ans ((1) the ṣūbahs (provinces) of Hindūstān, (2) the ṣūbahs of the Deccan, (3) itineraries from Delhi to various parts of India, (4) Muslim and Hindu saints) edited by the author’s grandson, C̲h̲andar-bhān Muns̲h̲ī Kāyat’h Saksēnah, surnamed Rāy-zādah, who added a preface dated 1204/1789–90: Bodleian 264 (ah 1203/1789⁸⁸), i.o. 3779 (18th cent.), 3944 (ah 1221/1807), d.p. 627 (early 19th cent.), 3935 (ad 1895), 3880 (ad 1895 ?), Lindesiana p. 130 no. 448 (circ. ad 1800), Edinburgh 410, Rieu iii 909b (19th cent.), Bānkīpūr vii 542 (19th cent.), Berlin 476 (1), Āṣafīyah i p. 236 no. 350 (ah 1299/1881–2), Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (Guls̲h̲an i and pt. of Guls̲h̲an ii. See Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii, no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926), p. 48).

English translation of the topographical and statistical portions, i.e. parts of Guls̲h̲an i, most of Guls̲h̲an ii and all of Guls̲h̲an iii: The India of Aurangzib (topography, statistics, and roads) compared with the India of Akbar with extracts from the Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh and the Chahar Gulshan translated and annotated by Jadunath Sarkar, Calcutta 1901°*, pp. 123–78.

Descriptions: (1) Elliot and Dowson History of India viii pp. 255–6, (2) J. Sarkar The India of Aurangzib, Calcutta 1901, pp. xv–xxv.

¶ § 632. Dastūr al-ʿamal (?) (beg. Ba-mūjab i tawārīk̲h̲ i Hinduwī), a history of India from the earliest times to ah 1179/1765 with chronological, statistical etc. notices largely in tabular form: Berlin 473 (ah 1179/1766), 474 (transcript of the preceding ms.).

§ 633. Ānand-rūp, a Brāhman born at C̲h̲āngulnāt’h⁸⁹ near Nārnaul, spent some years in the service of Jānōjī⁹⁰ Bhōṅslā and Sītā-Rām. Having gone from Nāgpūr in the suite of Nāṣir al-Mulk Nāṣir-Jang, he wrote his Mīzān i dānis̲h̲ at Ilāhābād (Allahabad) in 1182/1768–9.

Mīzān i dānis̲h̲, a brief sketch of Indian history: Rieu iii 910 (ad 1851).

§ 634. For the Farḥat al-nāẓirīn, a history, mainly of India, completed in 1184/1770–1 by M. Aslam Parasrūrī, see pp. 109–110 supra, and for the Ḥadīqat al-ṣafāʾ completed in the same year by Yūsuf ʿAlī K̲h̲ān see p. 109 supra.

§ 635. Nawwāb⁹¹ Maḥabbat K̲h̲ān⁹² b. Faiḍ-ʿAṭā K̲h̲ān was a descendant of Dilēr K̲h̲ān Dāwud-zāy (d. 1094/1683), a Rohilla general in Aurangzēb’s service, whose elder brother, Bahādur K̲h̲ān, founded S̲h̲āhjahānpūr.

Ak̲h̲bār i Maḥabbat, a general history of India to ah 1186/1772, giving special attention to the author’s ancestors and to S̲h̲āhjahānpūr and Bengal:⁹³ Rieu iii 911a (ad 1850), 1052b (extracts only), i.o. 3926 (probably ad 1878).

Extracts translated by Muns̲h̲ī Sadāsuk’h: b.m. ms. Add. 30,782, foll. 309–415.

Description and 14 pp. of translated extracts: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii 376–393.

¶ § 636. Jūgal Kis̲h̲ōr compiled for Sir Elijah Impey (Chief Justice of the Supreme Court at Calcutta 1774–83, d. 1 Oct. 1809⁹⁴)

(Tārīk̲h̲ i Jūgal Kis̲h̲ōr), an unimportant⁹⁵ history of India from the death of ʿAdlī to the date of composition: Rieu iii 1029b (foll. 38b–42. Extracts only), 1051b (extracts only).

Description: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii p. 300.

§ 637. A resident of the district of Sanbhal and Badāʾūṅ in Rōhēlk’hand wrote in 1194/1780, when Najaf K̲h̲ān⁹⁶ was master of Delhi and the Jāt territories and Faiḍ Allāh K̲h̲ān was the reigning Rohilla chief,

A sketch of Indian history from Akbar to ah 1194/1780 written as a supplement to ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq Dihlawī’s D̲h̲ikr al-mulūk (see p. 346 supra), with special attention to the Rohillas: Rieu iii 1007a (19th cent.).

§ 638. For the Siyar al-mutaʾakhkhirīn of S. G̲h̲ulām-Ḥusain K̲h̲ān Ṭabāṭabāʾī, which is a history of India from Aurangzēb’s death in 1118/1707 to ah 1195/1780–1, but to which the author subsequently added a Muqaddimah consisting of Sujān Rāy’s K̲h̲ulāṣat al-tawārīk̲h̲ with slight alterations and which thus became in effect a general history of India, see pp. 499–503 infra.

§ 639. G̲h̲ulām-Bāsiṭ Amēṭ’hawī,⁹⁷ having lost his estate in Oudh and tried unsuccessfully to enter the service of the Tīmūrids, became muns̲h̲ī to General Giles Stibbert (Commander-in-Chief of the Bengal Army 1777–9 and 1783–5), who took him to Calcutta. At the latter’s request he wrote the Tārīk̲h̲ i mamālik i Hind.

(Tārīk̲h̲ i mamālik i Hind), a short history of India to ah 1196/1781–2 (the date of composition) based mainly on Firis̲h̲tah: Rieu i 237 (18th cent.), ii 798a (history of Malabar only. ah 1197/1783), iii 1051b (extracts only), Suppt. 83 ii (chapter on Gujrāt only. 19th cent.), Rehatsek p. 76 no. 15 (ah 1240⁹⁸ /1824–5), Ethé 2835 (only the preface and the latter half of the history. Transcribed from the preceding ms. ah 1296/1879).

¶ Description and a short translated extract: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii pp. 200–3.

§ 640. Har-c̲h̲aran-Dās b. Ūdai Rāy b. Mukund Rāy b. Sāgar-Mal, a native of Meerut, went to Delhi soon after Nādir S̲h̲āh’s invasion [ah 1151/1739] and some years later entered the service of Nawwāb Qāsim ʿAlī K̲h̲ān b. Qāsim K̲h̲ān, who was father-in-law and k̲h̲ān-sāmān to Najm al-Daulah M. Isḥāq K̲h̲ān.⁹⁹ In 1167/1753–4 Qāsim ʿAlī K̲h̲ān moved from Delhi to Faiḍābād (Fyzabad) but died immediately afterwards, and Har-c̲h̲aran-Dās, who had accompanied him, remained there in the service of his late master’s descendants. For many years he received an allowance from Nawwāb S̲h̲ujāʿ al-Daulah of Oudh. In 1199/1784–5, when he wrote the preface of the C̲h̲ahār gulzār i S̲h̲ujāʿī, he had reached an advanced age.¹⁰⁰

C̲h̲ahār gulzār i S̲h̲ujāʿī, a history of India to ah 1201/1786–7, dedicated to S̲h̲ujāʿ al Daulah and divided into five c̲h̲amans ((1) Brahmā, Mahēś etc., (2) the Satya Yuga,¹⁰¹ (3) the Trētā Yuga, (4) the Dwāpar Yuga, (5) the Kalī Yuga, this fifth c̲h̲aman being subdivided into two ṣafḥahs, of which the first treats, in twelve qisms, of the Hindu Rājahs from Jud’his̲h̲tir to the Muslim conquest, and the second, in nine qisms, of the Muslim sovereigns, the ninth qism containing the history of the Tīmūrids from Humāyūn to S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam and including a discursive but valuable account of the author’s own times): Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (autograph? See Oriental College Magazine vol. ii no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926) p. 48), Rieu iii 912a (preface and chapters from the latter part of the last qism only. 19th cent.).

Extracts translated by Muns̲h̲ī Sadāsuk’h Lāl: b.m. ms. Add. 30,782, foll. 113–205.

Description and 23 pp. of translated extracts: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii pp. 204–31.

[Autobiographical statements in the preface and elsewhere (see Elliot and Dowson viii pp. 204–6, Rieu iii 92).]

¶ § 641. Lac̲h̲hmī Narāyan “S̲h̲afīq” Aurangābādī was born at Aurangābād in 1158/1745. His father, Rāy Mansā-Rām, for many years held high office in the Niẓām’s dominions and in 1204/1789–90 was (had perhaps long been) Dīwān.¹⁰² Lac̲h̲hmī Narāyan entered the service of ʿĀlī-Jāh, son of Niẓām-ʿAlī K̲h̲ān¹⁰³ (Rieu i p. 326a, iii p. 1083a, apparently from the Natāʾij al-afkār). The date of his death does not seem to be recorded,¹⁰⁴ but it was not before 1214/1799, the date of the Bisāṭ al-g̲h̲anāʾim. He received instruction in Persian from “Āzād” Bilgrāmī (Nis̲h̲tar i ʿis̲h̲q, Sprenger p. 645), whom he calls his pīr (Gul i raʿnā, Bānkīpūr viii p. 128). He wrote poetry both in Persian and Urdu, and called himself at first “Ṣāḥib” but afterwards, at “Āzād’s” request, “S̲h̲afīq.”¹⁰⁵ In addition to the Ḥaqīqat-hā i Hindūstān he wrote three tad̲h̲kirahs, the C̲h̲amanistān i shuʿarāʾ (ad 1761. Urdu poets. Edition: Aurangābād 1928. See b.s.o.s. v/4 (1930) p. 927), the Gul i raʿnā (ah 1182/1768–9. Indian poets. Bānkīpūr viii 701, i.o. 3692–3, Rieu iii 972b, Rehatsek p. 161) and the S̲h̲ām i g̲h̲arībān (ah 1182/1768–9. Poets who visited India. No copies recorded), the Tanmīq i s̲h̲igarf (ah 1200/1786. A history of the Deccan. Ethé 447, 448. Cf. Rieu ii 859b), the Maʾāt̲h̲ir i Āṣafī (ah 1204/1793. A history of the Niẓāms. Ethé 468, Ivanow 196, Rieu iii 1039a), the Bisāṭ al-g̲h̲anāʾim (ah 1214/1799. A history of the Marāṭhās. Rieu i 328–9, Āṣafīyah i p. 220, Ethé ii 3018, Rehatsek p. 73), a description of Ḥaidarābād (ah 1214/1799. Rieu i 327a) and a historical work entitled K̲h̲ulāṣat al-Hind (Āṣafīyah i p. 238, where the precise subject is not stated).

(1)

Ḥaqīqat-hā-yi Hindustān¹⁰⁶ (a chronogram = 1204/1789–90), a historical and topographical account of India written for the benefit of the author’s munificent patron, Captain William Patrick (so Rieu, but perhaps Kirkpatrick¹⁰⁷ should be read) and divided into four maqālahs ((1) revenue returns based on some drawn up by the author’s grandfather, brought down from various dates to the Faṣlī year 1139, and signed by Niẓām al-Mulk, (2) account of the ṣūbahs of Hindūstān, (3) account of the ṣūbahs ¶ of the Deccan, (4) sketch of the Muslim rulers of India from Muʿizz al-Dīn b. Sām to ʿĀlī-Gauhar (S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam)): Rieu i 238b (ah 1224/1809), 238a (ah 1283/1866), iii 913a (ad 1851), Ivanow 179 (ah 1288/1871), Bānkīpūr vii 543 (19tb cent.), Ethé 426.

(2)

K̲h̲ulāṣat al-Hind: Āṣafīyah i p. 238 no. 705 (where the precise subject is not stated).

[Gul i raʿnā (Bānkīpūr viii p. 131); Nis̲h̲tar i ʿis̲h̲q (“S̲h̲afīq’s” biography summarised in Sprenger p. 645); Natāʾij al-afkār (information summarised in Rieu iii 1083a); Rieu i 327a, iii 1083a; Niẓāmī Badāyūnī Qāmūs al-mas̲h̲āhīr (in Urdu) ii p. 167.]

§ 642. Muns̲h̲ī Hīrām [?] or Hanīrām [?], son of D’hanīrām, son of D’hanrāj, was Qānūngō of the paryanah of Ūnām (i.e. Unao in Oudh). It was after 1207/1792 that he compiled from various Sanskrit and Persian sources his

Rāj-Sōhāwalī, a history of the Hindū Rājahs and the Muḥammadan rulers of India to ah 1194/1780 in S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam’s reign together with statistical tables of the ṣūbahs of Hindūstān: Ethé 208.

§ 643. Sarūp C̲h̲and K’hatrī compiled in 1209/1794–5 for Sir John Shore (afterwards Baron Teignmouth, Governor-General 1793–8)

Ṣaḥīḥ al-ak̲h̲bār, a general history of India to the author’s time: Rieu iii 1031a (extracts only).

Description and a translated extract (1 1/3 p.): Elliot and Dowson History of India viii pp. 313–5.

§ 644. Aʿazz al-Dīn Muḥammad wrote in 1218/1803–4 for Major William Yule (the father of Sir Henry Yule) his

Muk̲h̲taṣar i Yūl, a sketch of the Delhi Sulṭāns and the Tīmūrids, said by Rieu to be merely a transcript of the Tārīk̲h̲ i Ḥaqqī (see p. 346 supra) with a meagre continuation: Rieu i 238b (early 19th cent.).

§ 645. Mirzā Masītā,¹⁰⁸ a descendant of Ilāh-wirdī K̲h̲ān Jahān-gīrī, wrote in the time of S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam (reigned ah 1173/1759–1221/1806) for the instruction of his son Karīm Allāh K̲h̲ān, called Mirzā Kallū, his

Intik̲h̲āb al-tawārīk̲h̲, a mere sketch of Indian history in an introduction, two books ((1) Northern India, (2) the Deccan) and a conclusion: Rieu iii 1052a (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850).

Description: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii 334–5 (the only ms. known to Elliot was in one of the Royal Libraries at Lucknow).

¶ § 646. Harnām Sing’h “Nāmī” b. Gūrdās Sing’h, a Sāraswat Brāhman, of Brāhmanābād in the province of Lahore, resided near Lucknow. His father was Nāʾib to ʿAin al-Dīn K̲h̲ān, Governor of Barēlī ah 1195/1781–1199/1784–5 and afterwards of Gōrak’hpūr, and Harnām Sing’h himself was in his service from childhood.

Tārīk̲h̲ i saʿādat i jāwīd, a general history of India to ah 1220/1805–6, written in 1221/1806–7, dedicated to Saʿādat ʿAlī K̲h̲ān, the Nawwāb Wazīr of Oudh, and divided into four faṣls ((1) Early Rājahs, (2) Kings of Delhi to S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam, (3) Amīrs and Rājahs of Āṣaf al-Daulah’s time, etc., (4) the Seven Climates, etc.), useful for biographical details of Indian nobles: Rieu iii 913a (defective at end. Circ. ad 1850).

Extracts translated by Muns̲h̲ī Sadāsuk’h: b.m. ms. Add. 30,786, foll. 1–81.

Description and 14 pp. of translated extracts: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii 336–354.

§ 647. Rāy Amar Sing’h “K̲h̲wus̲h̲-dil” tells us in the prose preface¹⁰⁹ to his Razmistān that he was born and bred at Ghāzīpūr but had been resident for some years at Benares. In the poem itself he speaks of his being appointed Muns̲h̲ī to Alexander Duncan.¹¹⁰ The Qāmūs al-mas̲h̲āhīr states on unspecified authority that he was the son of Jīwan Rām Kāyast’h, that his [his father’s ?¹¹¹] original home (aṣlī waṭan) was Kaṛṛah Mānikpūr, that in the time of S̲h̲ujāʿ al-Daulah [ah 1169/1756–1189/1775] he [his father?²] was Nāẓim and Ḥākim i aʿlā of G̲h̲āzīpūr, that on completing his education he entered the service of Mahārājah C̲h̲ait¹¹² Sing’h of Benares (reigned ah 1185–95), that subsequently he was appointed Nāẓim¹¹³ of ʿAlīgaṛh by the East India Company, that he wrote a Tārīk̲h̲ i farmān-rawāyān i Hind, and that he died in 1225/1810.¹¹⁴

(1)

¶ Zubdat al-ak̲h̲bār, an abridgment of Sujān Rāy’s K̲h̲ulāṣat al-tawārīk̲h̲ (see p. 357 supra) continued to ah 1221/1806–7: Rieu iii 1052a foll. 170–94 (extracts only).

Translated extracts: b.m. ms. Add. 30,781 foll. 60–69.

Description: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii pp. 374–5.

(2)

Razmistān (or Bazm i k̲h̲ayāl?¹¹⁵), a versified sketch of Indian history, chiefly the British period, to ah 1210/1795–6, dedicated to Jonathan Duncan, Resident at Benares 1788–95, and completed in 1211/1796–7:¹¹⁶ i.o. 3975 (ad 1896), 4019 (ad 1892), Rieu iii 1017b foll. 34–46, 52–57 (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850).

[Razmistān, preface etc.; Niẓāmī Badāyūnī Qāmūs al-mas̲h̲āhīr (in Urdu) i p. 104; probably also Riyāḍ al-wifāq (Sprenger p. 167) and Beale Oriental biographical dictionary p. 70.]

§ 648. A certain Kānjī-Mal wrote

A chronological list of the Hindu Rājahs from Jud’hishtir to Pit’hōrā and of the Muḥammadan rulers from S̲h̲ihāb al-Dīn G̲h̲ōrī to the accession of Akbar S̲h̲āh in 1221/1806: Rieu iii 9176 (ah 1225/1810).

§ 649. Daulat Rāy Kāyat’h Saksēnah composed in 1225/1810

C̲h̲ahār (c̲h̲ār) chaman, a general history of India: Rieu iii 10586 (description only).

§ 650. Muns̲h̲ī Sadāsuk’h “Niyāz” Dihlawī was employed at the close of the 18th century in some official capacity under Government at C̲h̲unār. At the age of 65 he left Delhi for Ilāhābād, where after ten years spent in literary work, ¶ including the composition of Persian, Urdu and Bhākā verse, he began his history. In addition to this work he wrote also the Tanbīh al-g̲h̲āfilīn (cf. Rieu iii 918a), on Hindu tribes and sects, and the ʿAjāʾib al-Hind (cf. ibid. 1030b) on remarkable places etc. in India.

Muntak̲h̲ab al-tawārīk̲h̲, composed in 1234/1818–19, a general history of India to 1233/1817–18, valuable for the reign of S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam and later times: Rieu iii 914a (complete. ad 1849), 1021b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), 1052b (extracts only).

Extracts translated by Muns̲h̲ī Sadāsuk’h Lāl: b.m. ms. Add. 30,786, foll. 82–291.

Description and 4 pp. of translated extracts: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii 403–411.

[Elliot and Dowson viii 403–5; Rieu iii 914a.]

§ 651. Nūr-Muḥammad b. Mirzā M. K̲h̲urāsānī completed in 1240/1824–5 and dedicated to Sirāj al-Umarāʾ ʿAẓīm-Jāh, Nawwāb of the Carnatic,

Sirāj al-tawārīk̲h̲, a vast general history with special reference to India: Ethé ii 3009 (autograph brouillon).

§ 652. A large work on the political and natural history of India projected by ʿAẓīm-Jāh, Nawwāb of the Carnatic (i.e. M. ʿAlī K̲h̲ān Bahādur Sirāj al-Umarāʾ, who was installed on 3 Feb. 1820 and died on 12 Nov. 1825), was entrusted by him to the superintendence of Maulawī M. Ṣibg̲h̲at Allāh entitled ʿAẓīm-Nawāz K̲h̲ān Bahādur Muʿtamad-Jang ʿUmdat al-ʿUlamāʾ Muftī Badr al-Daulah, who has already been mentioned (pp. 174–175 supra) as the author of a Dāstān i g̲h̲am written in 1250/1834–5. Of the collaborators selected by Maulawī Ṣibg̲h̲at Allāh for the various parts the most prominent was Riḍā Ṣāḥib known as Ḥakīm Bāqir Ḥusain K̲h̲ān Bahādur, who devoted himself particularly to the history of the Carnatic from the time of Saʿd Allāh K̲h̲ān to that of Wālā-Jāh (this portion of the history does not occur in the only recorded manuscript). After Riḍā Ṣāḥib’s death S. Murtaḍā (i.e. no doubt “Bīnis̲h̲”, author of the tad̲h̲kirah, Is̲h̲ārāt i Bīnis̲h̲, mentioned below in the subsection Biogbaphy: Poets) undertook to supply other portions of the political history, but the work was interrupted by the Nawwāb’s death and remained unfinished. Both Maulawī Ṣibg̲h̲at Allāh and S. Murtaḍā were still alive in 1859, the latter as teacher in the Madrasah [at Arcot presumably].

ʿAẓīm al-tawārīk̲h̲,¹¹⁷ a history, mainly of India, planned to consist of seven maqālahs and five muqaddimahs, but differently divided in the ¶ only recorded manuscript, which is evidently incomplete, lacking, for example, the Carnatic and Mysore history (which was to be the subject of Maqālah vii): Ethé 430 (consisting of (1) a general introduction on the value of historiography, the sources for the Hindu period and an outline of pre-Muḥammadan Indian history, (2) history of the Creation, the Patriarchs, the Hindu rājahs and the rise of Islām in India, (3) [called Maqālah iii] the G̲h̲aznawids, (4) [called Maqālah iv] the Delhi Sulṭāns to ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn [K̲h̲aljī], (5) [called Maqālah v] the Delhi Sulṭāns from Buhlūl Lōdī, (6) [called Maqālah vi] the Indian Tīmūrids to Muḥammad S̲h̲āh. These are followed by a portion called Jāmiʿ al-as̲h̲yāʾ or Has̲h̲t c̲h̲aman on natural history).

§ 653. Kis̲h̲an-Dayāl K’hatrī, of Delhi, completed in 1826 his As̲h̲raf al-tawārīk̲h̲, which he wrote for presentation to Rājah C̲h̲andū Lāl “S̲h̲ādān”,¹¹⁸ Pēs̲h̲kār at Ḥaidarābād.

As̲h̲raf al-tawārīk̲h̲, an enormous compilation in seven books ((1) epitome of the Śiva-Purāṇa etc., (2) translation of the Rāmāyaṇa, (3) translation of the Bhāgavata-Purāṇa, (4) Hindu saints, (5) epitome of the Mahābhārata, history of the Hindū Rājahs, the Muḥammadan kings of G̲h̲aznī and Delhi to Akbar ii, (6) the revenues of Hindūstān and Persia, (7) account of the seven climates etc.): Rieu iii 1026b (foll. 48–70. Extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), 1042b (foll. 147–152. Account of the K’hatrī caste only. Circ. ad 1850), cf. 1052b. [Elliot knew of only two mss., both in the possession of the author’s family.]

Description: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii 411–2.

§ 654. S. Aḥmad K̲h̲ān b. S. Muttaqī K̲h̲ān, or Sir¹¹⁹ Saiyid,¹²⁰ as he is commonly called by the Muḥammadans of India, was born at Delhi on 17 October, 1817. His maternal grandfather, K̲h̲wājah Farīd al-Dīn Aḥmad,¹²¹ was Prime Minister to Akbar ii. Entering the East India Co.’s service, he was appointed Saris̲h̲tah-dār ¶ (Record-keeper) of the Ṣadr Amīn’s¹²² Court at Delhi in 1837, Nāʾib Muns̲h̲ī “or deputy reader” in the office of the Commissioner of Āgrah in 1839, Munṣif or Sub-Judge at Mainpūrī in 1841, at Fatḥpūr-Sīkrī in 1842 and at Delhi in 1846.¹²³ Subsequently he was Ṣadr Amīn at Rohtak (1850) and Bijnaur (1855), Principal Ṣadr Amīn¹²⁴ at Murādābād (1858), G̲h̲āzīpūr (1862), and ʿAlīgaṛh (1864), and Judge of the Small Cause Court at Benares (1867). He retired in 1876, settled at ʿAlīgaṛh, died there on 27 March 1898 and is buried at the side of the mosque of the ʿAlīgaṛh Muslim University. He was a Member of the Legislative Council of the North-West Provinces and from 1878 to 1882 a Member of the Viceroy’s Council. In 1882 he was made a k.c.s.i.

Sir Saiyid Aḥmad’s fame, however, rests not on his official career but on the distinguished services which he rendered to education and the spread of enlightenment among the Muḥammadans of India. Unlike his bitter opponents¹²⁵ among the orthodox, who regarded modern knowledge as useless and dangerous to faith, he believed education of the European type to be the only means of raising the status of India’s Muḥammadans and enabling them to play their part worthily in the history of their country. In 1858 he opened a school at Murādābād for the study of modern history, in 1864 he founded the Translation Society of G̲h̲āzīpūr (which afterwards became the Scientific Society of ʿAlīgaṛh) for the translation of English books into Urdu, in 1870 he started a monthly periodical entitled Tahd̲h̲īb al-ak̲h̲lāq (English title: The Mohammedan social reformer) and formed a “Committee for the better diffusion and advancement of learning among the Mohammedans of India”. Finally in 1875 came the opening of the Muḥammadan Anglo-Oriental College at ʿAlīgaṛh (now the ʿAlīgarḥ Muslim University), of which he was the chief promoter and which is the most widely known of the memorials which he left behind him.

Sir Saiyid’s labours had lasting effects in several different directions. They profoundly influenced Indian Muslim education. They stimulated the growth of a modernist or liberalising school of religious thought among educated Indian Muḥammadans. They contributed to the promotion of friendly relations ¶ between Europeans and Indians.¹²⁶ They changed the course of Urdu prose style. According to T. Grahame Bailey Sir S. Aḥmad “exercised more influence upon Urdu than perhaps any other single man in the nineteenth century … He wrote good, flowing and simple Urdu, discarding the florid style of his predecessors in journalism…. Ultimately, so far as prose went, he won a complete victory, and no one now thinks of writing in the style of Surūr when he has before him as a model the forceful and straightforward writing of Sir Sayyid”.

In the latter part of his life S. Aḥmad was the leading personality among the Muḥammadans of India. He was undoubtedly the greatest man produced by Indian Islām in the nineteenth century.

Sir Saiyid’s numerous works¹²⁷ were nearly all in Urdu. Among them were Āt̲h̲ār al-ṣanādīd (on the archaeology of Delhi. Delhi 1847°*, Delhi 1853–4°, Lucknow 1876*. French translation: Description des monuments de Dehli en 1852, d’après le texte hindoustani de Saiyid Ahmad Khan, par M. [J.H.] Garcin de Tassy (in, and offprinted from, the Journal asiatique 1860–1), Tabyīn al-kalām fī tafsīr al-Taurāh, wa-’l-Injīl ʿalā millat al-Islām (The Mohomedan commentary on the Holy Bible. Urdu and English. Pts. i (Introduction) and ii (Genesis), G̲h̲āzīpūr 1862°. Pt. iii (St. Matthew) is described by Graham (p. 71) as “now in the press”¹²⁸), Tafsīr al-Qurʾān (an Urdu translation and commentary. Vols. i and ii, ʿAlīgaṛh 1880°. Vol. vi 1309/1891–2.¹²⁹ Part of the series entitled Taṣānīf i Aḥmadīyah. Six volumes (to the end of Sūrah xvii) were published and a seventh (to Sūrah xxi, completing about half of the work) was ready for the press when Sir Saiyid died), Ibṭāl i g̲h̲ulāmī, on the evils of the slave trade, Āgrah 1893,* Sīrat i Farīdīyah, a life of his maternal grandfather, Āgrah 1896*.

Among the works of which English translations¹³⁰ have appeared are The loyal Mohammedans of India (on the Muḥammadans who remained loyal to the Government, saved the lives of Europeans and rendered other services at the time of the Mutiny), 1860–1 (see Graham pp. 58–69, where some extracts are given but where the place of publication is not mentioned, and Oriental College Magazine xiii no. 2 p. 13, where it is said that this publication was issued ¶ in parts as a sort of periodical in Urdu and English), A series of essays on the life of Mohammed and subjects subsidiary thereto, vol. i, London 1870*,¹³¹ Review on Dr. Hunter’s Indian Musalmans¹³² Benares 1872*, The causes of the Indian revolt. Written [in 1858] … in Urdoo … and translated … by his two European friends [Auckland Colvin and G.F.I. Graham], Benares 1873*, On the present state of Indian politics, Allahabad 1888*.

Collections of his lectures and speeches were published under the titles Lakc̲h̲arōṅ kā majmūʿah (Lahore 1890*), Majmūʿah i lakc̲h̲ar-hā (Sād’haurah 1892*) and Tahd̲h̲īb al-akhlāq (speeches delivered from 1287/1870 to 1293/1876. Vol. ii published at Lahore in 1896*). A collection of his letters compiled by his grandson, S. Ross Masood, has been published under the title K̲h̲uṭūṭ i Sar Saiyid (2nd ed., Badāyūṅ [1931]).

He was editor of the Tārīk̲h̲ i Fīrōz-S̲h̲āhī (of Baranī) published at Calcutta (Bibliotheca Indica) in 1860–2, of the Tūzuk i Jahāngīrī printed at his own presses at G̲h̲āzīpūr and ʿAlīgaṛh in 1863–4 and of the Āʾīn i Akbarī published by Nawal Kis̲h̲ōr at Lucknow in 1869.

Jām i Jam, written for r.n.c. (afterwards Sir Robert) Hamilton, Commissioner of Āgrah,¹³³ and completed in Ṣafar 1255/1839, tabulated information (viz. title, father’s name, mother’s name, race (Lōd’hī, C̲h̲ag̲h̲atāv etc.), date of birth, place of accession, date of accession, poetical chronogram, if any, for that date, length of reign, length of life, date of death, poetical chronogram, if any, for that date, posthumous title, if any, place of burial, observations) concerning the Muḥammadan sovereigns of Delhi from the time of Tīmūr, who comes first followed by Nuṣrat S̲h̲āh, to that of the last Tīmūrid, Bahādur S̲h̲āh: Rieu i 284b (ad 1839), Lindesiana p. iii no. 416 (ah 1258/1842), Bānkipūr vii 595 (ah 1266/1849–50), 596, Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (Dībāc̲h̲ah only. See Oriental College Magazine, vol. iii/1 (Nov. 1926) p. 66), i.o. 4030 (transcribed apparently from a Delhi edition of 1268).

Editions: Akbarābād [i.e. Āgrah, not Delhi, as stated in the b.m. Catalogue] 1840°, Delhi 1268/1851–2 (from which the i.o. ms. mentioned above was apparently transcribed).

Description: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii pp. 430–1.

¶ [His genealogy in the preface to the Jām i Jam and in the K̲h̲uṭabāt i Aḥma­dīyah (and also in Ḥayāt i jāwīd Pt. 2, appendix 1); Garcin de Tassy Histoire de la littérature hindouie et hindoustanie, seconde éd., tome iii (Paris 1871), pp. 37–41; Beale Oriental biographical dictionary under Sayyad Ahmad; Safar-nāmah i Panjāb [an Urdu account of S. Aḥmad’s visit to the Panjāb in 1884], by S. Iqbāl ʿAlī, ʿAlīgaṛh 1884; G.F.I. Graham The life and work of Syed Ahmed Khan, Edinburgh and London 1885 (portrait frontispiece); G.F.I. Graham Reviews on Syed Ahmed Khan’s life and work, ʿAlīgaṛh 1886; Ḥayāt i jāwīd [a detailed Urdu biography], by Alṭāf Ḥusain “Ḥālī”, Cawnpore 1901 (portrait frontispiece); G. Zaidān Mashāhīr al-s̲h̲arq [in Arabic], pt. ii (Cairo 1903), pp. 67–74 (Portrait p. 67); Ḥayāt i Sar Saiyid Aḥmad [an Urdu translation by M. Fārūq of Zaidān’s notice], ʿAlīgaṛh 1903; Buckland Dictionary of Indian biography p. 7; Ency. Isl. under Aḥmed K̲h̲ān (Blumhardt); Niẓāmī Badāyūnī Qāmūs al-mas̲h̲āhīr [in Urdu], i pp. 315–16; Ram Babu Saksena A history of Urdu literature, Allahabad 1927, pp. 269–72; Sir Saiyid Ahmed Khan. By H.G. Rawlinson (in Islamic culture, iv/3 (July 1930) pp. 389–96); T. Grahame Bailey A history of Urdu literature pp. 85–6; Unnīswīṅ ṣadī kā ēk muṣannif aur mufakkir, by S.M. ʿAbd Allāh (in the Oriental College Magazine, vol. xiii, no. 2 (Lahore, Feb. 1937) pp. 3–25, no. 4 (August 1937) pp. 20–31, in progress.]

§ 655. In 1262/1846 was composed

Tārīk̲h̲ i Hindūstān: ʿAlīgaṛh Subḥ. mss. p. 58 no. 11 (defective at end).

§ 656. It was in 1264/1848 that M. Riḍā “Najm” Ṭabāṭabā¹³⁴ (for whom see p. 115 supra) completed his

Ak̲h̲bārāt i Hind (chronogram), a general history of India to ah 1264/1848 dedicated to Sir H. Elliot, forming vol. v of the author’s historical encyclopaedia Baḥr al-zakhkhār and consisting largely of matter abridged from vol. iii (Majmaʿ al-mulūk, see p. 116 supra) and vol. iv (Mafātīḥ al-riʾāsat, see p. 413 infra) but with considerable additions:¹³⁵ Rieu iii 914b (circ. ad 1848), 1014b ii (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), 1018b v (extracts only. ad 1849).

¶ Account of the work by the author with full statement of contents: Rieu iii 1053a.

Description with 3 ½ pp. of translated extracts: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii 436–440.

§ 657. Mīr K̲h̲wurs̲h̲ēd ʿAlī “K̲h̲wurs̲h̲ēd”, commonly called Saiyid S̲h̲āh ʿAlī, b. S. Dastgīr “Dastgīr” translated into Persian under the title Tārīk̲h̲ i Hind (the first part only (?) of) an English work entitled apparently Epitome of the History of Hindoostan, in which according to the preface the author proposed to give the history of India from the time of Maḥmūd G̲h̲aznawī to the British conquest.

Tārīk̲h̲ i Hind. Edition: Madras 1267/1851°* (extending to the year ad 1289).

§ 658. Ḥakīm Jawāhir La‘l Akbarābādī, a physician by profession, was editor of the Urdu newspaper Ak̲h̲bār al-nawāḥ wa-nuzhat al-arwāḥ which was published at Āgrah and which, according to Garcin de Tassy, at first contained good literary and scientific articles but after 1851 became less interesting and more exclusively devoted to the news of the day. He edited also the Etawah newspaper published in English, Hindi and Urdu editions entitled respectively People’s Friend, Prajāhit and Muḥibb i raʿāyā.

His works include (1) Mak̲h̲zan al-tawārīk̲h̲, an Urdu translation of the Zubdat al-tawārīk̲h̲ (an abridgment of the Siyar al-mutaʾakhkhirīn). Āgrah 1853*, (2) Muntak̲h̲ab al-tawārīk̲h̲, an abridgment of the Mak̲h̲zan al-tawārīk̲h̲, Āgrah 1855*, (3) Maʿdinīyāt (in Urdu) on minerals and their uses, Āgrah 1855*, (4) Śakuntalā nāṭaka, an Urdu translation from the Sanskrit of Kālidāsa, Āgrah 1873*, (5) a Persian translation of Mōtī La‘l’s Urdu Pand-nāmah i kās̲h̲tkārān, Āgrah 1854°.

Tārīk̲h̲ i Hind, a history of India from the earliest times to the Second Burmese War in 1852, translated by Jawāhir La‘l from an Urdu original (also by J.L.?). Edition: Āgrah 1855°*.

[Garcin de Tassy ii 91–2.]

§ 659. G̲h̲aut̲h̲ Muḥammad K̲h̲ān succeeded his father ʿAbd al-G̲h̲afūr K̲h̲ān as Nawwāb of Jāōrah (a state of 568 square miles in Mālwah, Central India) in 1825 at the age of two. During the Mutiny of 1857 he rendered important services to the Government of India. He established kōṭwālīs in the taḥṣīls, where criminal cases were heard, and opened a hospital and a court of Muḥammadan law. He died in 1865.

Majmaʿ al-salāṭīn, “tabulated lists of the emperors of Hindustan and the sovereigns of England, with statistical accounts of the provinces of India” ¶ (pp. 69). Editions: Jāōrah 1272/1856°, place ? 1279/1862–3¹³⁶ (Āṣafīyah i p. 252 no. 257), place ? 1286/1869–70 (Āṣafīyah i p. 252 no. 872).

[Central India State Gazetteer Series: Western States (Mālwā) Gazetteer. Vol. V.—Part A, Text. Compiled by Capt. C.E. Luard, Bombay 1908, pp. 184–5.]

§ 660. Mīrzā Naṣr Allāh K̲h̲ān “Fidāʾī”,¹³⁷ entitled Nawwāb Daulat-Yār-Jang Bahādur, was the son of M. Ḥusain K̲h̲wus̲h̲-nawīs Iṣfahānī. A year or two after leaving Persia for the purpose of travel he conceived the desire of doing some work which should be both a present to his countrymen and a service to the language of his ancestors. He decided, therefore, to write a history of India. For some years he hesitated to undertake unaided so difficult a task and he was moreover occupied with the duties of tutor to Mīr Maḥbūb ʿAlī K̲h̲ān¹³⁸ (bah āmūzgārī u ham-nishīnī i Bandagān i wālā Nawwāb Fatḥ-Jang Niẓām al-Daulah Niẓām al-Mulk Āṣaf-Jāh Mīr Maḥbūb ʿAlī K̲h̲ān Bahādur nām-zad būdam).

Early in 1301/1883 he began the Dāstān i turk-tāzān i Hind and he completed it towards the end of 1303/1886.¹³⁹ According to the Āṣafīyah catalogue, i p. 730 no. 133, he died in 1314/1896–7.

Dāstān i turk-tāzān i Hind, a history of the Muḥammadan rulers of India from M. b. Qāsim’s invasion to the death of Bahādur S̲h̲āh in 1862, based mainly on English sources and written in “pure Persian”.¹⁴⁰ Edition: Bombay¹⁴¹ 1309/1892*¹⁴² (5 vols.).

§ 661. Kunwar Durgā-Pars̲h̲ād “Mihr” Sandīlī, the son of Rājah D’hanpat Rāy, was born in 1846. In 1867 he succeeded his father as raʾīs, and in 1884 he was appointed an Honorary Magistrate of Sandīlah. He was still living in 1897. In ¶ addition to the Gulistān i Hind he wrote a history of Oudh, Būstān i Awad’h, which was published at Lucknow in 1892°*, and a tad̲h̲kirah of poetesses, Ḥadīqah i ʿis̲h̲rat, published at Sandīlah in [1894°*].

Gulistān i Hind (alternatively, in the 1889 edition, The Universal History of India in commemoration of the Queen’s Jubilee 1887) in four daftars ((i) Hindu Rājahs, (ii) the Muḥammadan period, (iii) the British period to 1877, (iv) the author and his ancestors) written in 6 months after the Jubilee darbār at Hardoi. Editions: Lucknow 1889°, Sandīlah 1897°*.

[Gulistān i Hind (Sandīlah 1897) pp. 23 etc. (portrait at beginning of book); Būstān i Awad’h pp. 213 etc.; Hardoi District Gazetteer pp. 71, 85; Portrait in An illustrated historical album of the Rajas and Taaluqdars of Oudh compiled and illustrated by Darogah Haji Abbas Ali, Allahabad 1880*, no. 90.]

§ 662. Mīrzā Muḥammad b. M. Rafīʿ, entitled Malik al-kuttāb, S̲h̲īrāzī was born at S̲h̲īrāz in 1269/1852–3. In 1285 he settled in Bombay and there he founded the bookselling and publishing business in connexion with which he was best known. In 1300/1882–3 the title of Malik al-kuttāb was conferred on him by the Persian Government and in 1317/1899–1900 that of K̲h̲ān Ṣāḥib by the Government of India.

His works include (1) Iksīr al-tawārīk̲h̲ wa-Siyar al-aʾimmah (see p. 165 supra), (2) Mirʾāt al-zamān (see p. 340 supra), (3) Tārīk̲h̲ i Inglistān (see p. 337 supra), (4) Tārīk̲h̲ i qadīm Yūnān (see p. 338 supra), (5) Alf nahār, “anecdotes and reflections on various subjects” (Edwards), Bombay 1313/1896°, (6) Āyāt al-wilāyah, a defence of the claims of ʿAlī and the 12 Imāms to the Caliphate, Bombay [1898°], (7) Miftāḥ al-rizq, on the mutual relations of employers and employed, Bombay 1315/1898°, (8) Kas̲h̲f al-ṣinā‘ah, or Muntak̲h̲abāt i Muḥammadī, an account of various arts, Bombay 1311/1894°, (9) Tad̲h̲kirat al-k̲h̲awātīn, notices of Islāmic poetesses, Bombay 1306/1889°, (10) Tuḥfat al-k̲h̲awātīn, on the hygiene of married women, Bombay 1325/1907°.

Among the books published by him was the Tad̲h̲kirah of Daulat-S̲h̲āh (Bombay 1887°).

Zīnat al-zamān fī tārīk̲h̲ Hindūstān mausūm bah Tāj al-tawārīk̲h̲ wa-sulālat al-siyar. ¹⁴³ Edition: place ? 1310/1892–3 (see Āṣafīyah iii p. 104 no. 1036).

[Prāg Narāyan Bhārgava Ṣaḥīfah i zarrīn (in Urdu), Lucknow 1902, Bombay section p. 97.]

¶ § 663. Appendix

(1)

Kanz i maḥfūẓ,¹⁴⁴ a history in nine rauḍahs subdivided into hātifahs by “Mirzā Mahdi Samad b. ʿAli ’l-Hādi ʿAlīm ad-dīn Muḥammad Mahdi” [sic]: Eton 178.

(2)

Nasab al-ansāb, a general history of India: Lindesiana p. 201 no. 881 (ah 1210/1795).

(3)

Tad̲h̲kirat al-mulūk, a brief review of Indian dynasties to 1208/1793–4, apparently different from Ethé 409: Ivanow 180 (mid 19th cent.).

(4)

Tad̲h̲kirat al-salāṭīn, by Abū ’l-Qāsim Nūr-Muḥammad: Lindesiana p. 109 no. 419 (circ. ad 1770).

(5)

Tārīk̲h̲ i Kār-nāmah [?], metrical narratives relating inter alia to M. b. Sām, Quṭb al-Dīn Aibak and Īltutmis̲h̲:¹⁴⁵ Rehatsek p. 131 no. 16 (inadequately described).

(6)

Tārīk̲h̲ i salāṭīn i Dihlī, manẓūm (? identical with the preceding): Āṣafīyah i p. 226 no. 673.

next chapter: 12.2 Sulṭāns of Delhi