Storey Online

12.3.1 History of India: The Tīmūrids: General
(4,399 words)

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

previous chapter: 12.2 Sulṭāns of Delhi

§ 676. For the (Tārīk̲h̲ i K̲h̲ānadān i Tīmūrīyah), a history of Tīmūr (foll. 7–134), his successors to Sulṭān Ḥusain Mīrzā (foll. 136–234), Bābur (foll. 238–73), Humāyūn (foll. 273–95) and Akbar to the 22nd year of his reign, see pp. 233–234 supra.

§ 677. In the reign of S̲h̲āh-Jahān (ah 1037/1628–1068/1658) was written

A short (78 foll.) history of Bābur, Akbar and S̲h̲āh-Jahān, preceded by an account of Tīmūr (beg. Maḥāmid i jamīlah): Bānkīpūr vii 571 (ends abruptly in S̲h̲āh Jahān’s eighth regnal year. 17th cent.).

§ 678. M. Bak̲h̲tāwar K̲h̲ān has already been mentioned (p. 102 supra) as the ostensible author of the Mirʾāt al-ʿālam composed in 1078/1667.

Tārīk̲h̲ i Hindī,1 a history of India from Bābur to Aurangzēb: Princeton 468.

§ 679. For the Jawāhir al-tawārīk̲h̲ of Salmān Qazwīnī, a history of the Mug̲h̲uls from Adam to ah 1037/1627 written in the reign of Aurangzēb (ah 1068/1658–1118/1707), see p. 233 supra.

§ 680. Saiyid Mufaḍḍal K̲h̲ān has already been mentioned (p. 105 supra) as the author of a general history entitled Tārīk̲h̲ i Mufaḍḍalī.

(Tīmūr-nāmah i Mufaḍḍalī), a short history of the Tīmūrids to the reign of Farruk̲h̲-siyar (ah 1124/1713–1131/1719): Rieu iii 923b (ends abruptly in F.’s reign. Circ. ad 1850), 1054b (extracts only).

§ 681. M. Hādī entitled Kāmwar K̲h̲ān has already been mentioned (pp. 361–362 supra) as the author of the Haft guls̲h̲an i Muḥammad-S̲h̲āhī completed in, or soon after, 1132/1719–20

Tad̲h̲kirat al-salāṭīn i C̲h̲ag̲h̲atā, a history of the house of Tīmūr, especially its Indian branch, written after the Haft guls̲h̲an (see p. 361)2 and divided into two volumes ((1) from the origin of the Turks to the death of Jahāngīr, (2) from S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s accession to the sixth or (in one or two mss.) the seventh year of Muḥammad S̲h̲āh, ah 1137–8/1724–5):3 Rieu iii 924 (vol. i only. Autograph, ah 1135/1723), i 274b (vol. i, lacking Jahāngīr’s reign. 18th cent.), 275a (vol. i. 18th cent.), 275a (extracts from vol. i. 19th cent.), iii 1022a (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), Glasgow (see j.r.a.s. 1906, p. 596, no. 5) (ah 1140/1727), Bānkīpūr vii 591 (vols. i–ii, ending with 6th year of Md. S̲h̲āh. Vol. i dated ah 1154/1741), Ethé 395 (large portion of vol. ii, extending from ah 1039/1630 to 1132/1719–20, but with lacunæ. Not later than ah 1197/1783), i.o. D.P. 591 (vol. i. ah 1255/1839), i.o. 3918 (vol. ii, extending to end of Jumādā i ah 1136/1724, the second month of M. S̲h̲āh’s sixth regnal year. ad 1883), 4010 (extract from vol. ii, viz. Bahādur S̲h̲āh’s reign to 1 S̲h̲aʿbān 1123/14 Sept. 1711 in the fifth and penultimate year. Probably ad 1897 or 1898), 4074 (vol. ii, extending to beginning of M. S̲h̲āh’s seventh year, but damaged and lacking the whole of Aurangzēb’s reign and most of Bahādur S̲h̲āh’s. 18th cent.), Blochet i 605–6 (complete apparently. 18th cent.), 607 (end of vol. i and beginning of vol. ii, from Akbar to 29th year of Aurangzēb. Late 18th cent.), 608 (vol. ii, lacking end of Aurangzēb’s reign and nearly all of Md. S̲h̲āh’s. 18th cent.), 609 (part of vol. ii, from Bahādur S̲h̲āh to beginning of Farruk̲h̲-siyar’s reign. Late 18th cent.), 610 (part of vol. ii, from death of Aurangzēb to 6th year of Md. S̲h̲āh. 18th cent.), 611 (part of vol. ii, from death of Aurangzēb to 5th year of Md. S̲h̲āh. 18th cent.), Majlis 244 (vol. i. ah 1234/1818–19), Būhār 77 (vol. i. 19th cent.), 78 (vol. ii, to 6th year of Md. S̲h̲āh. ad 1870), r.a.s. P. 100 = Morley 96 (vol. i), P. 101 = Morley 97 (vol. ii, to 7th year of Md. S̲h̲āh), Ivanow 168 (vols. i–ii).

Descriptions: (1) W. Nassau Lees Materials for the history of India (j.r.a.s. 1868) pp. 469–70, (2) Elliot and Dowson History of India viii 17–20 (with an extract of i p.).

§ 682. For Ḥājjī Mīr M. Salīm’s Silsilat al-salāṭīn [?], of which the first part is a history of the Mug̲h̲ul race from Adam onwards, C̲h̲ingiz K̲h̲ān, Tīmūr etc., and especially of the Indian Tīmūrids to Muḥammad S̲h̲āh (reigned ah 1131/1719–1161/1748) see p. 298 supra.

§ 683. Niẓām al-Dīn M. Hādī b. M. Mahdī al-Ḥusainī al-Ṣafawī, known as S̲h̲āh Mīrzā and Mīrzā Mahdī K̲h̲ān Ṣafawī,4 composed the Ḍiyāʾ al-ʿuyūn (see p. 41 supra) in 1114/1702–3 at Ḥaidarābād and the Qaḍāyā i salāṭīn i Dakan (Ethé 446) in 1156/1743.

Majmūʿah i Mīrzā-Mahdī-k̲h̲ānī (a chronogram = 1142/1729–30), a brief sketch of the history of the Indian Tīmūrids: Ivanow 167 (late 18th cent.), Āṣafīyah iii p. 102 no. 1257 (ah 1235/1819–20), i p. 252 nos. 445 (ah 1247/1831–2), 641 (possibly also p. 244 no. 655 (S̲h̲āhān i Hind by Mīrzā Mahdī K̲h̲ān Iṣfahānī)), Bombay Univ. 157 (ah 1263/1847), Ethé 412, 413, 414, 470 foll. 177b–189b.

§ 684. Dalpat Rāy entitled (muk̲h̲āṭab) Rāō Dalpat Sing’h was born at Aḥmadābād, where his father, Gulāb Rāy, was Mutaṣaddī. He made himself well acquainted with Arabic, Persian, Sanskrit, Prākrit and Bhāk’hā (i.e. Hindī). For eight years he was in the service of Mahārājah Jagat Sing’h of Ūdaipūr (reigned 1147/1734–1165/1751), for whom he prepared a Hindī translation of the Dīwān of Ḥāfiẓ. The invasion of Aḥmad S̲h̲āh Abdālī in 1173 (or rather 1174/1760) compelled him to leave Delhi, where he was staying, for Jaipur. Here at the age of 57 years he undertook by order of Mahārājah Mād’hau Sing’h (d. 1181/1767–8) his

Malāḥat i maqāl, completed after the Mahārājah’s death, a collection of historical anecdotes, the first part relating to the Tīmūrids and their amīrs in chronological order with some account of Jagat Sing’h and Mād’hau Sing’h, the second part miscellaneous under subject headings: Ivanow Curzon 119 (ah 1235/1819–20), Rieu iii 1005b (circ. ad 1850).

§ 685. S. Sulṭān ʿAlī Ḥusainī Mūsawī Ṣafawī Ardabīlī travelled eastward from Ardabīl, his native place, and settled at Lucknow in the time of S̲h̲ujāʿ al-Daulah. In the second year of the reign of Saʿādat-‘Alī, ah 1213/1798, he decided to write a history of India from the time of Tīmūr to the death of Muḥammad S̲h̲āh.

Maʿdin al-saʿādat, a detailed history of the Indian Timūrids and the Nawwābs of Oudh dedicated to Saʿādat ʿAlī K̲h̲ān and extending to his seventh year, ah 1218/1803–4: Ivanow 181 (lacking most of the k̲h̲ātimah (description of India)), Rieu iii 1052a (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850).

English translation of the preface and table of contents: b.m. ms. Add. 30,781 foll. 30–56.

Description: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii p. 354.

[Maʿdin al-saʿādat, preface (see Elliot and Dowson loc. cit.).]

§ 686. Ṣūfī Ṣanʿān b. Mirzā Bābā wrote the

Tārīk̲h̲ al-salāṭīn, a short (34 foll.) and negligible chronicle of Tīmūr’s successors and the Indian Mug̲h̲uls to S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam: Ethé 428 (ah 1220/1806. Autograph ?).

§ 687. Maulawī K̲h̲air al-Dīn Muḥammad Ilāhābādi was born at Allahabad on 12 Safar 1165/31 Dec. 1751. Educated at Allahabad and Jaunpūr, he became a teacher in a madrasah of his own (madrasah i k̲h̲wud) at Allahabad, but when the province of Allahabad was transferred by the E.I.Co. to Nawwāb S̲h̲ujāʿ al-Daulah [after the Treaty of Benares in 17735], the Nawwāb confiscated the stipends of the teachers of Allahabad, and K̲h̲air al-Dīn M. sought employment with officials of the E.I.Co. He was attached to the staff of Captain W. Bruce in the operations which led to the capture of Gwalior in 1780. Subsequently he assisted James Anderson, British Resident in Sīnd’hiyah’s camp, in his negotiations with the Marāṭhās, but left his service in 1200/1785 on account of illness and returned to Allahabad. After a short period in the service of the S̲h̲āh-zādah Jahāndār S̲h̲ah, he went from his birthplace to Lucknow in 1202/1788 (Rieu iii 946a) or 1206/1791–2 (Rieu iii 1028b) at the request of Āṣaf al-Daulah. Then for some years he taught at Allahabad and Benares. In 1209/1794–5 the practice of appointing British judges and registrars was introduced, and he served under two successive judges at Jaunpūr, the second being A. Welland. It was at Jaunpūr that he spent the years of his retirement. He died about 1827.

At the end of his Tad̲h̲kirat al-ʿulamāʾ, on the scholars of Jaunpūr, written in 1216/1801 (Edition: Calcutta 1934), he mentions numerous works of his own. These include (1) ʿIbrat-nāmah, on the reign of S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam (see p. 504 infra), (2) Jaunpūr-nāmah (see p. 549 infra), (3) Tuḥfah i tāzah, on the history of Benares (see p. 552 infra), (4) Guwāliyār-nāmah (see p. 580 infra), (5) ʿĀlam-ās̲h̲ūb, a history of India from Nādir S̲h̲ah’s invasion to the death of Najaf K̲h̲ān (this work he describes as unfinished), (6) Gulzār i asrār, anecdotes of Indian saints, (7) Sarābistān, anecdotes of Indian kings, (8) K̲h̲air al-majālis, an abridgment of Nūr Allāh s̲h̲ūs̲h̲tarī’s Majālis al-muʾminīn, (9) Burhān i imāmat, written by order of Āṣaf al-Daulah, (10) K̲h̲awāriq i Qādirīyah, written at the request of S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam, as well as works on such subjects as dogmatic theology, law, logic, philosophy, rhetoric and grammar. A work entitled Tawallā-yi ʿAzīz, in which he seeks to show that the author of the Tuḥfah i It̲h̲nā-ʿAs̲h̲arīyah [i.e. ʿAbd al-‘Azīz Dihlawī, for whom see pp. 19–20 supra] was secretly a S̲h̲īʿite, is preserved in the India Office (d.p. 273 (a)). For his account of a short period in the history of Oudh (Rieu iii 948a) see p. 554 infra.

Sketch of Tīmūrid history from Bābur to S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam with a chronological abstract of the latter’s reign to his death in 1221/1806: Rieu iii 948a (circ. ad 1850).

[Autobiography in the Tad̲h̲kirat al-ʿulamāʾ, k̲h̲ātimah (Calcutta edition pp. 67–75, trans. pp. 74–82); autobiographical statements in the Jaunpūr-nāmah (see Rieu i 311a), the Tuḥfah i tāzah (see Rieu iii pp. 964b, 965a), the ʿIbrat-nāmah (see Rieu iii 946) and the Guwāliyār-nāmah (see Rieu iii 10286); Elliot and Dowson History of India viii p. 237; Rieu iii 946, 964, 1028b, i 311; Bānkīpūr vii pp. 97, 140; Buckland Dictionary of Indian biography p. 235.]

§ 688. M. ʿAlī K̲h̲ān Anṣārī has already been mentioned (p. 112 supra) as the author of the general history Baḥr al-mawwāj completed according to the preface in 1209/1794–5 but in fact extending to 1211/1796. The part of that history relating to the Indian Tīmūrids is for all practical purposes a reproduction of the Tārīk̲h̲ i Muẓaffarī, which was composed originally in 1202/1787–8 for the purpose of obtaining the patronage of Muʿīn al-Daulah Mubāriz al-Mulk K̲h̲ān i K̲h̲ānān S.M. Riḍā K̲h̲ān Bahādur Muẓaffar-Jang (Nāʾib-Nāẓim of Bengal and Bihār), then resident at Murs̲h̲idābād, where he died in Ṣafar 1206/1791.

Tārīk̲h̲ i Muẓaffarī, a history of the Indian Tīmūrids to ah 1202/1787–8, subsequently continued to ah 1225/1810, valuable for M. S̲h̲ah’s reign and later times: Lindesiana p. 191 no. 870 (ah 1205/1790–1212/1797), Berlin 479 (lacks continuation. Bears seal dated 1206), Ivanow Curzon 39 (breaks off in ah 1222/1807. ah 1247 (?)/1831–2), Ivanow 182 (ends with ah 1209/1795. ah 1293/1876), 183 (ends with ah 1225/1810. ah 1295/1878), Rieu i 282b (ends with ah 1225/1810. Early 19th cent.), iii 925a (ends with ah 1212/1797. ad 1849), 925a (S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam’s reign to ah 1201/1786–7. Circ. ad 1850), 1027a (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), 1030b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1844), i.o. 4550 (ends with ah 1212/1797. ah 1266/1849), 3906 (ends with ah 1212/1797. ad 1878), 3954 (reigns of Bahādur S̲h̲āh and Jahāndār S̲h̲āh only. ad 1892), 3883 (reigns of Aḥmad S̲h̲āh and ʿĀlamgīr ii probably from the Baḥr al-mawwāj.6 18th cent.), 3994 (reigns of Farruk̲h̲-siyar, Rafīʿ al-Darajāt etc., and M. S̲h̲āh probably from the Baḥr al-mawwāj.1 ad 1891), Bānkīpūr vii 593 (breaks off in middle of S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam’s reign, the last date being 1202/1788. 19th cent.), possibly also vii 545 (S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam’s reign to ah 1200/1785. 19th cent.), ʿAlīgaṛh Subḥān Allāh mss. p. 58 no. 954 (8), Āṣafīyah i p. 230 nos. 450 and 722.

Extracts translated by Dīn Muḥammad: b.m. ms. Add. 30782 foll. 206–32.

Extracts translated by J. Dowson: Elliot and Dowson History of India viii pp. 317–30.

§ 689. Mahārājah Kalyān Sing’h b. S̲h̲itāb Rāy (see p. 566 infra).

K̲h̲ulāṣat al-tawārīk̲h̲, a history in two bābs of which the first deals with the Indian Tīmūrids to ah 1227/1812 and the second, which has in some mss. the independent title Wāridāt i Qāsimī and is the longer and by far the more important, with the Nāẓims of Bengal. For further information see p. 567 below.

§ 690. Aḥmad ʿAlī b. Yūsuf ʿAlī Faiḍābādī.

(Muk̲h̲taṣar dar aḥwāl i Tīmūrīyah), an untitled sketch of Indian history under the Tīmūrids to the year 1228/1813 (more than half of the work being devoted to S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam ii) written in 1245/1829–30 at the request of Mahārājah Kīrat Chand: i.o. 4429 (circ. ad 1850).

§ 691. M. Riḍa “Najm” Ṭabāṭabā7 has already been mentioned (pp. 115, 384 supra) as the author of the Zubdat al-g̲h̲arāʾib, the Majmaʿ al-mulūk and the Ak̲h̲bārāt i Hind.

Mafātīḥ al-riʾāsat, a history of India from 1151/1738–9 to 1251/1835–6 forming vol. iv of the author’s historical encyclopaedia Baḥr al-zakhkhār (cf. Elliot and Dowson History of India viii 433): Rieu iii 1014b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), 1018b vi foll. 126–252 (extracts, ad 1849), cf. 1053a (papers relating to vol. iv).

§ 692. Rājah Apūrva Krishna “Kunwar”, or Apūrva Krishna Dēva, born in 1815 (see Proceedings of the A.S.B., 1925 p. xxxi), was the son of Rājah Rāj Krishna (d. ad 1823, aged 428) and the grandson of Rājah Nava Krishna, the “Nob Kissen” who rendered important services to the British in Clive’s time and whose name is repeatedly mentioned in the histories of that period.9 He was thus a brother of Mahārājah Sir Narendra Krishna, k.c.i.e., and of Rājah Kālī Krishna. On the title-page of the S̲h̲āh-nāmah i Hind (Calcutta 1848) he is described as “Honorary Poet to His Majesty the King of Delhi, and Member of the Hamburg Academy, &c., &c., &c.” According to Loke Nath Ghose he died in 1867. He seems to have lived a simple and uneventful life at Sovabazar, Calcutta. For his dīwān see Sprenger p. 474.

S̲h̲āh-nāmah i Hind (on the English title-page The History of the Conquerors of Hind from the most early period to the present time: containing an account of the religion, government, usages and character of the inhabitants of that kingdom), a poem of which the two chapters published in 1848 extend to the time of Bābur but are concerned mainly with Tīmūr and S̲h̲āh-Ruk̲h̲: Lindesiana p. 114 no. 774 (vol. (chapter ?) iv (reigns of Bābur and Humāyūn). ah 1257/1841).

Editions: Calcutta 1848 (chapters i and ii (only ?), extending to the time of Bābur but dealing mainly with Tīmūr and S̲h̲āh-Ruk̲h̲. The b.m. has chapter i), Lahore [1899°*, chapters i and ii only],

[Ṭaiyib Allāh Lives of Maha Raja Apurva Krishna Bahadurhis father and grandfather (Mat̲h̲nawī i Ṭaiyib Allāh), Calcutta 1847°; Sprenger p. 474; Garcin de Tassy i pp. 217–18; Loke Nath Ghose The modern history of the Indian chiefs, rajas, zamin-dars, etc., pt. ii, Calcutta 1881, p. 121.]

§ 693. For the Tārīk̲h̲ i Faraḥ-bak̲h̲s̲h̲ of M. Faiḍ-Bak̲h̲s̲h̲ Kākōrī which begins with a history of the Tīmūrids see p. 556 below.

§ 694. Mirzā Asad Allāh K̲h̲ān “G̲h̲ālib” b. ʿAbd Allāh Bēg K̲h̲ān was born at Āgrah on 8 Rajab 1212/27 Dec. 1797. His grandfather was a Turk of Samarqand who had migrated to India in S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam’s reign and had been given a manṣab by Najaf K̲h̲ān. “G̲h̲ālib” was only five years old when his father, at that time a military officer in the service of Rājah Bak̲h̲tāwar Sing’h of Alwar, was killed in battle. He and his younger brother were adopted by their uncle, Naṣr Allāh Bēg K̲h̲ān, a commander of 400 horse in Lord Lake’s army, but, when “G̲h̲ālib” was nine years old, his uncle died, and his jāgīr, consisting of two parganahs in the neighbourhood of Āgrah, reverted to the government. In compensation “G̲h̲ālib” was granted a small government pension, which for the greater part of his life seems to have been almost his only regular income.

In 1266/1850 Bahādur S̲h̲āh conferred upon him the titles of Najm al-Daulah Dabīr al-Mulk Niẓām-Jang and appointed him to write a history of the Tīmūrids at a salary of Rs. 50 a month. The Mihr i nīm-rūz published in 1852 represents the first half of this task, but “G̲h̲ālib”, who was evidently in no hurry to complete the undertaking, had not written the second half when the Mutiny of 1857 led to the deposition of Bahādur S̲h̲āh. Wājid ʿAlī S̲h̲āh, King of Oudh (ah 1263/1847–1272/1856), granted “G̲h̲ālib” a stipend of Rs. 500 a year, but only two years afterwards, in 1856, Oudh was annexed by the E.I.Co. and that stipend ceased. Two years after the Mutiny Nawwāb Yūsuf ʿAlī K̲h̲ān of Rāmpūr assigned to him a pension of Rs. 100 a month, and this was continued by Nawwāb Kalb-ʿAlī K̲h̲ān to the end of “G̲h̲ālib’s” life. He died at Delhi on 2 D̲h̲ū ’l-Qaʿdah 1285/14 Feb. 186910 at the age of 73.

It is chiefly as an Urdu poet—one of the greatest, if not actually the greatest—that “G̲h̲ālib” is still remembered. His Urdu dīwān has often been published (e.g. Cawnpore 1278/1861°, Lucknow 1873*, 1881°, Cawnpore 1887*, Delhi 1889*) and under the title Muraqqaʿ i C̲h̲ug̲h̲tāy [sic] (with illustrations by M. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān C̲h̲ug̲h̲tāy) at Lahore in [1928]. Other Urdu works well known in India are Urdū i muʿallā, a collection of letters, and ʿŪd i Hindī, a collection of letters and reviews.

His Persian poetical works have been published under the title Kullīyāt i G̲h̲ālib at Lucknow in 1872° and 1924–5‡ (3rd ed.). A Persian dīwān, doubtless for the most part identical with the Kullīyāt, was published at Delhi in 1261/1845 (506 pp. See Sprenger p. 410), and there is a ms. at Bānkīpūr (Catalogue vol. iii no. 441). The Abr i guhar-bār, an unfinished mat̲h̲nawī on the life of Muḥammad, was published separately at Delhi in 1280/1863° and is included in the Lucknow Kullīyāt (p. 111). The Qaṣīdah i bar-guzīdah, an ode to Queen Victoria, of which there is a manuscript in the Bibliotheca Lindesiana (Catalogue p. 202 no. 613), is also in the Kullīyāt (p. 241).

Of his Persian prose works in addition to the Mihr i nīm-rūz the following have been published: (1) Panj āhang, a collection of letters, prose compositions, lists of words and other material useful to a student of ins̲h̲āʾ,11 Delhi 1853* and in the Kullīyāt i nat̲h̲r i G̲h̲ālib, [Lucknow,] 1871°*, pp. 2–254, Cawnpore 1884†, 1888*. (2) Qāṭiʿ i burhān, criticisms of the Persian dictionary Burhān i qāṭiʿ, [Lucknow,] 1278/1862°. (3) Dirafs̲h̲ i Kāvayānī, an enlarged edition of the preceding, Delhi 1865°. (4) Dastanbūy, reminiscences of the Mutiny at Delhi, Bareilly 1871* and in the Kullīyāt i nat̲h̲r i G̲h̲ālib, [Lucknow,] 1871°*, pp. 377–416, Cawnpore 1884†, 1888*.

Mihr i nīm-rūz, a short history of the Tīmūrid line from the Creation to the reign of Humāyūn undertaken by the author on receiving the titles of Najm al-Daulah, Dabīr al-Mulk and Niẓām-Jang from Bahādur S̲h̲āh on 23 S̲h̲aʿbān 1266/4 June 1850 and intended to form the first half of a work entitled Partawistān and to be followed by a second half entitled Māh i nīm-māh dealing with the period from Akbar to Bahādur S̲h̲āh:12 i.o. D.P. 583 (ah 1270/1854).

Editions: Fak̲h̲r al-maṭābiʿ [Delhi?] 1268/1852*, 1271/1854–5,13 and in the Kullīyāt i nat̲h̲r i G̲h̲ālib, Nawal Kis̲h̲ōr, [Lucknow,] 1871°*, pp. 255–376, Cawnpore 1884†, 1888*.

[Autobiographical statements in Dastanbūy, esp. pp. 392–5, Mihr i nīm-rūz, preface, and various passages in his poems; Guls̲h̲an i bī-k̲h̲ār (cf. Sprenger p. 228); Riyāḍ al-afkār (Bānkīpūr Suppt. i p. 57); Sprenger pp. 204, 228, 410; Haft āsmān pp. 166–7 Garcin de Tassy i pp. 475–82 (where will be found an abridged French translation of the obituary notice in the Awad’h ak̲h̲bār of 16.3.1869); M. Ḥusain “Āzād” Āb i ḥayāt (in Urdu. Originally published circ. 1880), Lahore 1899, pp. 466–99; Bānkīpūr iii pp. 269–70; Ency. Isl. under G̲h̲ālib (Blumhardt); Alṭāf Ḥusain “Ḥālī” Yādgār i G̲h̲ālib (in Urdu), Lucknow 1924; Saksēna A history of Urdu literature pp. 158–68, 263–5; T. Grahame Bailey A history of Urdu literature pp. 71–2, 84; an Urdu biography, G̲h̲ālib, by G̲h̲ulām-Rasūl “Mihr” (Lahore, date not stated) was reviewed at some length by S.M. ʿAbd Allāh in the Oriental College Magazine Vol. xiii no. 1 (Nov. 1936) pp. 71–84; Portraits facing p. 376 and Hiṣṣah i nat̲h̲r p. 28 in the Urdu translation of Saksēna’s work (Tārīk̲h̲ i adab i Urdū, Lucknow 1929).]

§ 695. By desire of Bahādur S̲h̲āh, the last Emperor of Delhi (1253/1837–1275/1857), Muḥammad Fak̲h̲r al-Dīn Ḥusain with the assistance of Ḥakīm M. Aḥsan Allāh K̲h̲ān and the painters G̲h̲ulām ʿAlī K̲h̲ān and Bābur ʿAlī K̲h̲ān began in 1266/1849–50 and completed in the following year

Mirʾāt al-as̲h̲bāh i salāṭīn i āsmān-jāh, chronological tables of the Indian Tīmūrids with their portraits and pictures of their tombs: Lindesiana p. 137 no. 775 (circ. 1850. Possibly this may be a copy of the lithograph mentioned below).

Edition: [Delhi ?] 1267/1851° (see Rieu i 285a).

§ 696. Mīrzā M. ʿAbd al-Qādir K̲h̲ān, commonly called (ʿurf) Mīrzā M. Āg̲h̲ā Jān,14 b. Muns̲h̲ī Mīrzā Aḥmad Jān b. Mīrzā S̲h̲āh-Muḥammad K̲h̲ān15 Āqah Bās̲h̲ Qājār Kābulī, was born at Sōngaṛh16 (A. i M. pp. 533, 8156) in the Mandsaur district of the Gwalior State. His grandfather had migrated from Kābul to Peshawar (A. i M. p. 59–10), and his father at the time of the Indian Mutiny of 1857 settled in Sōngaṛh (A. i M. pp. 512–14, 52 ult.-531–2), where he became right-hand man17 to Ṭ’hākur Kēsrī Sing’h, the Rājpūt ruler (raʾīs, wālī) of the tiny state of Sōngaṛh. On his father’s death in 1897 (A. i M. p. 81615–18) Mīrzā Āg̲h̲ā Jān succeeded to his father’s office (A. i M. p. 81620–21).

Awīmāq [sic18] i Mug̲h̲ul,19 completed in August 1900 apart from a (second) k̲h̲ātimah added in November 1901, an account of the Mug̲h̲ul tribes20 (Bāb i awwal dar bayān i aqwām i Mug̲h̲ūl, pp. 7–100) and a history of the Mug̲h̲ul dynasties (Bāb i dūyum dar tafṣīl i ijmāl i salāṭīn i Mug̲h̲ūl, pp. 101–832), Tīmūr21 and the Tīmūrids occupying pp. 271–695 (Bābur and the Indian Tīmūrīds from p. 389). Edition: Amritsar 1319/1902°*.

§ 697. Miscellaneous works relating to the Tīmūrids:

Fihrist i Tīmūrīyah, a sketch of Tīmūrid history to ah 1185/1771, written in 1203/1788: Bānkīpūr Suppt. 1771 (ah 1233/1817–18).
Humāyūn-nāmah, by ?, a history of the Mug̲h̲ul Emperors from Humāyūn [to ?]: Lindesiana p. 148 no. 833 (ah 1170/1756–7).
(Tārīk̲h̲ i Tīmūriyān), a sketch (foll. 13) of Tīmūrid history to ah 1221/1806: Bānkīpūr Suppt. i 1772 (19th cent.).

next chapter: 12.3.2 Bābur


^ Back to text1. According to Martinovitch this work “is not to be confused with Marāt al-ʿAlām [sic] ‘The Mirror of the World’, a general history by the same author”.

^ Back to text2. According to the preface of the later edition of the Haft guls̲h̲an (Ethé 394) the Tad̲h̲kirat al-salāṭīn i C̲h̲ag̲h̲atā was begun in 1135/1722–3.

^ Back to text3. “In the later years of the work it is little more than a record of appointments and promotions, with the concomitant presents and offerings” (Elliot and Dowson viii p. 18).

^ Back to text4. Ethé’s identification of this person with the author of the Tārīk̲h̲ i Nādirī (for which see p. 252 supra) is of course incorrect.

^ Back to text5. The printed text of the Tad̲h̲hirat al-ʿulamāʾ (p. 69s) gives the date 1176, probably an error or misprint for 1186, though the correct date is 1187.

^ Back to text6. These mss., if they had been identified sooner, would have appeared on p. 112 supra, but this place is almost equally appropriate, since the part of the Baḥr al-mawwāj dealing with the Indian Tīmūrids is practically identical with the Tārīk̲h̲ i Muẓaffarī.

^ Back to text7. Ṭabāṭabā, not Ṭabaṭabā’ī, seems to be the form used by M. Riḍā himself in his prefaces etc.

^ Back to text8. See Genealogical and other accounts of Maha-Raja Kali-Krishna Bahadur, Calcutta 1841*, p. 5.

^ Back to text9. For a detailed biography of “Nob Kissen” see N.N. Ghose’s Memoirs of Maharaja Nubkissen Bahadur, Calcutta 1901*. Cf. Buckland’s Dictionary of Indian biography under Naba Kishen.

^ Back to text10. 15 Feb. 1869 according to the Yādgār i Ghālib, p. 108, but, as 15 Feb. was 3 D̲h̲ū ’l-Qaʿdah, either the Muḥammadan or the Christian date must be incorrect.

^ Back to text11. The Panj āhang, described inexactly in the India Office catalogue as “a treatise on grammar and lexicography”, contains (1) Alqāb u ādāb u marātib i mutaʿalliqah i ān, i.e. complimentary formulae for use at the beginning and end of letters, pp. 4–21, (2) (a) rules for forming tenses etc. of the verb from the principal parts, pp. 21–26, (b) a list of verbs with their principal parts, pp. 26–33, (c) a list of idiomatic phrases, pp. 33–5, (d) a short glossary of more or less uncommon words, pp. 35–9, (3) a collection of verses by “G̲h̲ālib” suitable for quotation in letters, pp. 39–47, (4) a collection of prefaces, laudatory notices of books (taqārīẓ), and other prose pieces pp. 47–96, (5) letters to friends of the author, pp. 96–254. The pagination given above is that of the Kullīyāt i nat̲h̲r i G̲h̲ālib, in which the Panj āhang occupies pp. 2–254, the Mihr i nīm-rūz pp. 255–376 and the Dastanbūy pp. 377–416.

^ Back to text12. The second half was never written (see Yādgār i G̲h̲ālib p. 35).

^ Back to text13. The chronogrammatic colophon of an edition lithographed at the Fak̲h̲r al-maṭābiʿ in this year is reprinted in the [Lucknow] edition of 1871.

^ Back to text14. Not K̲h̲ān.

^ Back to text15. A genealogical tree of the author’s family (S̲h̲ajarah i Qājārīyah i Barlās) is given on p. 54 of the A. i M.

^ Back to text16. This Sōngaṛh is to be distinguished from better known places of the same name in Baroda and Kathiawar.

^ Back to text17. The precise title of his office is not stated. On the title-page the author is described merely as a resident (sākin) of Sōngaṛh.

^ Back to text18. This word is so vocalised on the title-page and in some chronogrammatic verses (not by the author) at the end, one line being Wa-lam yurqam bi-hād̲h̲ā ’l-ṭarzi qaṭʿan * kitābun fī Awīmāqi ’l-Mag̲h̲ūli [sic]. For the word see Ency. Isl. under Aimāḳ (Barthold) and Redhouse’s Turkish dictionary, where the pronunciation is given as Ōymāq.

^ Back to text19. So on the title-page, but Mug̲h̲ūl where the title occurs at the end of the preface. The author uses the two spellings interchangeably.

^ Back to text20. The author laments that the works dealing specially with the Mug̲h̲ul tribes, like the Tārīk̲h̲ i Ras̲h̲īdī (see p. 214 supra) and the Muqaddimah i Ẓafar-nāmah (see p. 221 supra), were unobtainable in India and therefore inaccessible to him.

^ Back to text21. The author uses the spelling GWRKĀN for Tīmūr’s title, not Gūrgān, as seems to be usual in India.

Cite this page
“12.3.1 History of India: The Tīmūrids: General”, in: Storey Online, Charles Ambrose Storey. Consulted online on 09 June 2023 <>
First published online: 2021

▲   Back to top   ▲