In Volume 1-1: Qurʾānic Literature, History, and Biography | Section 2, History, Biography, etc.
§ 742. M. Maʿṣūm b. Ḥasan b. Ṣāliḥ was for twenty-five years in the service of Prince M. S̲h̲āh-S̲h̲ujāʿ, S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s second son, who was Governor of Bengal and Orissa in his father’s reign and who was put to death by Aurangzēb in 1070/1660. In 1070/1659–60 he was spending a period of leave at Māldah when he conceived the idea of recording the events of recent years and wrote his
- Tārīk̲h̲ i S̲h̲āh-S̲h̲ujāʿī (possibly identical with, or a part of, the Futūḥāt i ʿĀlamgīrī or Wāqiʿāt i ʿĀlamgīrī described in Elliot and Dowson History of India vii 198), a life of Prince M. S̲h̲āh-S̲h̲ujāʿ and of the events which preceded and followed the accession of Aurangzēb: Bānkīpūr vii 572 (19th cent.), Ethé 340, Eton 191.
Extracts from the Futūḥāt i ʿĀlamgīrī are to be found in Rieu iii 1049a ix (circ. ad 1850), and 1058b fol. 64. There is a translation of the preface and headings in b.m. ms. Add. 30,779 foll. 170–9.
§ 743. S̲h̲ihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad b. M. Walī Ṭālis̲h̲1 accompanied Mīr Jumlah (Mīr M. Saʿīd Ardistānī, the K̲h̲ān i K̲h̲ānān) during his campaign against Kūc̲h̲ Bihār and Assam in the fourth and fifth years of Aurangzēb’s reign, ah 1072/1661–2 and 1073/1662–3, and after the death of Mīr Jumlah, who had sought to conceal the sufferings and losses of the Imperial army, desired to write a truthful account of the campaign, mainly with the object of bringing himself to the notice of the authorities and obtaining his recall from Bengal to the capital.
- Fatḥīyah i ʿibrīyah (or ʿibratīyah), often called Tārīk̲h̲ i Ās̲h̲ām or Tārīk̲h̲ i mulk i Ās̲h̲ām, an account of Mīr Jumlah’s campaign, in a muqaddimah, on the causes of the expedition, and two maqālahs ((1) Defeat of Bīm Narāyan and conquest of Kūc̲h̲ Bihār, (2) Conquest of Assam) ending with ¶ Mīr Jumlah’s death on his return to K̲h̲iḍrpūr 2 Ramaḍān 1073/1663, the year of composition: Blochet i 598 (ah 1073/1663. Possibly autograph), Bānkīpūr vii 574 (“not dated, but its appearance tends to suggest that it was written immediately after the composition”), 573 (ah 1181/1767. Written by the author’s grandson), 575 (18th cent. Calligraphic), Bodleian 240 (with a continuation to S̲h̲aʿbān 1076/1666.2 N.d. Possibly autograph), 241 (ah 1093/1682), i.o. 4047 (defective. 17th cent.), Ethé 341–3, 344 (2) (extracts only), Rieu i 266a (ah 1170/1757), 266b (ah 1189/1775), iii 936a (circ. ad 1850), 936b (circ. ad 1850), 1049b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), perhaps also ii 798a (ah 1197/1783), Ivanow 157 (18th cent.), 158 (19th cent.), Berlin 491 (ah 1206/1792), Browne Suppt. 225 (Christ’s), 226 (Christ’s), 887 (Christ’s).
Probably the Tārīk̲h̲ i Ās̲h̲ām mentioned without author’s name in Lindesiana p. 224 no. 156 (circ. ad 1760) is a copy of this work.
It is not clear from Rieu’s description whether the work which he calls “Account of Kūch Bahār, and Assam, with a detailed narrative of the campaign of Khānkhānān Muḥammad Muʿaẓẓam Khān” (Rieu ii 798a vi) is the Fatḥīyah i ʿibrīyah or not. He appends to the above description the words “see p. 266a” (where the Fatḥīyah i ʿibrīyah is described), but this manuscript does not occur in the index under Fatḥīyah i ʿibrīyah or S̲h̲ihāb al-Dīn Ṭālis̲h̲.
Edition: Tārīk̲h̲ i Ās̲h̲ām, Calcutta 1264/1847°*.
Abstract: Koch Bihár, Koch Hájo, and Ásám, in the 16th and 17th centuries, according to the Akbarnámah, the Pádisháh-námah, and the Fathiyah i ’Ibriyah. By H. Blochmann (in jasb. 41 (1872) pp. 49–101).
Translated extract: Assam and the Ahoms in 1660 A.D. By Jadunath Sarkar [being a translation of pp. 51–69 of Ivanow 157 or 158] (Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society vol. i (1915) 179–95).
Urdu translation by Mīr Bahādur ʿAlī Ḥusainī: Tārīk̲h̲ i Ās̲h̲ām, Calcutta 1805°*.
French translation from the Urdu: Tarikh-i Asham. Récit de l’expédition de Mir-Djumlah au pays d’Assam, traduit … par T. Pavie, Paris (Angers printed) 1845°*.
¶ § 744. Mīr ʿAlī ʿAskarī (commonly called Mīr ʿAskarī) b. M. Taqī K̲h̲wāfī was a disciple of the S̲h̲aṭṭārī saint Burhān al-Dīn Burhānpūrī called Rāz i Ilāhī (d. at Burhānpūr ah 1083/1672–3, or 1089/1678. See p. 363 supra), whose discourses he collected in 1053/1643–4 under the title T̲h̲amarāt al-ḥayāt (see Ethé 1896, Ivanow 1278 etc.), and in allusion to whom he chose the tak̲h̲alluṣ “Rāzī”. He was second Bak̲h̲s̲h̲ī to Prince M. Aurangzēb, who on his accession conferred upon him the title of ʿĀqil K̲h̲ān. After serving as Dārōg̲h̲ah of the G̲h̲usl-k̲h̲ānah and as Bak̲h̲s̲h̲ī i Tan, he was appointed Governor of the Province of Delhi in the 24th regnal year (ah 1091/1680–1092/1681) and he held this office until his death at the age of 82 in Rabīʿ ii 1108/Oct.–Nov. 1696.
ʿĀqil K̲h̲ān “Rāzī” was the author of a dīwān (Sprenger 467, Bodleian 1148) and of several mat̲h̲nawīs, e.g. the Muraqqaʿ (Ethé 1638, Berlin 962, Bānkīpūr iii 361–2, Ivanow 812, Sprenger 468), the S̲h̲amʿ u parwānah (Ethé 1634–5, Bodleian 1149, Ivanow 811, Sprenger 469), and the Mihr u Māh (Ethé 1634, 1636, 1637, Rieu ii 699a, Browne Suppt. 979 (Corpus 74), Ivanow Curzon 277, Sprenger 470. Edition: Lucknow, 1846 (acc. to Bānkīpūr iii 361)). Some Ṣūfistic meditations of his entitled Nag̲h̲amāt al-Rāzī were published at the end of ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq Dihlawī’s Marj al-baḥrain at Fatḥpūr in 1265/1849*.
- (Wāqiʿāt i ʿĀlamgīrī), or (Ẓafar-nāmah i ʿĀlamgīrī), an anonymous history of the first five years of Aurangzēb’s reign ending with Ṣafar 1073/Sept.–Oct. 1662 (after which follows a short note on S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s death in 1076/1666), ascribed sometimes (in certain colophons and e.g. in K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān ii 3213) to ʿĀqil K̲h̲ān “Rāzī”, but sometimes (see Rieu i 265b, Ethé 345) to Mīr K̲h̲ān. Ṣūbah-dār of Kābul (for whom see Maʾāt̲h̲ir al-umarāʾ ii 476–7, Beveridge’s trans. pp. 245–6): Ethé 345 (ah 1124/1712), 346 (ah 1204/1790), i.o. D.P. 695 (25th year of Md. S̲h̲āh [ah1155/1743]. In the colophon of this ms. the work is ascribed to ʿInāyat Allāh), Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (ah 1141/1728. See Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii, no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926), p. 54), Āṣafīyah i p. 258 no. 600 (ah 1190 1776–7), p. 248 no. 760 (defective at end. ah 1193/1779), Rieu i 265a (see Rieu’s Additions and Corrections, ah 1193/1779), ii 792b (ah 1232/1817), iii 905b (19th cent.), 936a (19th cent.), 936a (ah 1261/1845), 936a (ah 1264/1848), 1026b xxxii (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), 1026b v (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), 1054b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850), Browne Pers. Cat. 99 i (ah 1196/1782), Bānkīpūr Suppt. ii 2263 (ah 1202/1787), Ivanow 159 (slightly defective, ah 1252/1836–7), Curzon 31 (ah 1226/1812), 698 (ah 1327/1909), Būhār 483 i (19th cent.).
Edition: Wāqiʿāt i ʿĀlamgīrī, Lahore [1936‡] (ed. by M. Abdullah Chaghtai).
[Mirʾāt al-k̲h̲ayāl pp. 238–40 (Bodl. 374 no. 97); Kalimāt al-s̲h̲uʿarāʾ (Sprenger p. iii); Hamīs̲h̲ah bahār (Sprenger p. 123); Safīnah i K̲h̲wus̲h̲gū (see Bānkīpūr ¶ viii p. 86 ad fin.); Riyāḍ al-s̲h̲uʿarāʾ; Maʾāt̲h̲ir al-umarāʾ ii 821–3, Beveridge’s trans. pp. 264–6; K̲h̲ulāṣat al-kalām no. 29; Mak̲h̲zan al-g̲h̲arāʾib no. 894; Ouseley Notices of Persian poets p. 167; Riyāḍ al-afkār (Bānkīpūr Suppt. i p. 54); Sprenger pp. iii, 123, 543; S̲h̲amʿ i anjuman p. 172; Rieu ii 699; Ethé 1896.]
§ 745. Muns̲h̲ī M. Kāẓim, b. M. Amīn, a son of the author of the Pāds̲h̲āh-nāmah (see p. 445 supra), was appointed Muns̲h̲ī by Aurangzēb in the first year of his reign and was subsequently ordered to compile a history of the reign from the official records. In the 21st year (ah 1088/1677–8) he was appointed Dārōg̲h̲ah of the Ibtiyāʿ-k̲h̲ānah (Maʾāt̲h̲ir i ʿĀlamgīrī p. 163). He died at Delhi in 1092/1681.
- ʿĀlamgīr-nāmah, a history of the first ten years of Aurangzēb’s reign (to the end of Rajab 1078/15 Jan. 1668): Muntak̲h̲ab al-lubāb ii 210, Lindesiana p. 194 no. 917 (ah 1113/1701–2), no. 817 (ah 1128/1716), no. 375 (ah 1249/1833–4), Blochet i 595 (18th cent.), 596 (ah 1114/1702), 597 (defective. 18th cent.), Eton 187, 188 (ah 1115/1703–4), Ivanow 160 (early 18th cent.), 1st. Suppt. 762 (fragment. Late 18th cent.), Bodleian 243 (ah 1130/1718), 244 (once owned by M. S̲h̲āh), Ethé 347 (ah 1131/1719), 348 (ah 1130), 349 (old), 350 (ah 1138/1726), 351 (ah 1161/1748), 352–7, ii 3011 (n.d.), r.a.s. P. 131 = Morley 127 (ah 1150/1737), P. 132 = Morley 128 (ah 1152/1739), P. 133 = Morley 129 (ah 1157/1744), P. 134 = Morley 130 (ah 1157/1744), P. 135 = Morley 131 (ah 1225/1810), Rieu i 266b (ah 1150/1737), 267a (ah 1184/1778), 267a (18th cent.), 267b (early 18th cent.), 267b (18th cent.), 267b (ah 1233/1818), 267b (first part only = Calcutta ed. pp. 1–542), 267b (1st half. 18th cent.), ii 823b (victories over Jaswant Sing’h and Dārā-S̲h̲ukōh. ad 1717), Edinburgh 214 (old), 215 (ah 1193/1779), Bānkīpūr vii 576 (19th cent.), 577 (19th cent.), ʿAlīgaṛh Subḥān Allāh mss. p. 58 no. 7 (defective at end), Aumer 264, Browne Suppt. 850 (n.d.), 851 (not later than ad 1754. Trinity), Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (2 copies. See Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii, no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926) p. 54), Leyden iii p. 13 no. 924, Madras (2 copies).
Edition: Calcutta 1865–73°* (ed. k̲h̲ādim Ḥusain and ‘Abd al-Ḥaiy. Bibliotheca Indica).
Extract with English translation: A description of Assam. Extracted from the Alemgeernameh of Mohammed Cazim, and translated by H. Vansittart (in The Asiatick Miscellany, vol. i (Calcutta 1785*) pp. 458–80). The same English translation (without the Persian text) was published in The history of the first ten years of the reign of Alemgeer. Written … by M. Sakee. Translated by H. Vansittart (Calcutta 1785°*) pp. 61–77.
Description and 3 pp. of translated extracts: Elliot and Dowson History of India vii pp. 174–80.
¶ An abridgment (?): Intik̲h̲āb i ʿĀlamgīrī-nāmah [sic] Buk̲h̲ārā Semenov 5. For M. Sāqī Mustaʿidd K̲h̲ān’s abridgment of this work see below.
[ʿĀlamgīr-nāmah, preface; Tārīk̲h̲ i Muḥammadī (Rieu iii 895) fol. 256; Elliot and Dowson vii pp. 174–6; Rieu i 267, iii 1083b.]
§ 746. Ḥātim K̲h̲ān describes himself as a k̲h̲ānah-zād, i.e. the son of a court official. In the subscription to the b.m. ms. of his ʿĀlamgīr-nāmah, which was transcribed in Aurangzēb’s 47th year (ah 1115/1702), he is described as already dead.
- (ʿĀlamgīr-nāmah), a history of the early part of Aurangzēb’s reign abridged (with some additions) from M. Kāẓim’s work (see p. 460 supra) and stopping short at the beginning of the tenth year (p. 1038 in the printed text of M.K.’s ʿĀlamgīr-nāmah): Rieu i 268a (ah 1115/1702).
§ 747. Allāh-Yār b. Ḥājjī Muḥammad-Yār Uzbak Balk̲h̲ī.
- Auṣāf-nāmah i ʿĀlamgīrī, a panegyric on Aurangzēb in mixed prose and verse: Browne Pers. Cat. 100 (i) (bears Aurangzēb’s “bookplate” of ah 1081/1670–1).
- Aʿẓam-nāmah, a similar panegyric on Prince M. Aʿẓam: Browne Pers. Cat. 100 (ii) (same ms.).
§ 748. Īsar-Dās Nāgar,3 a resident of Paṭṭan, was from his youth to his thirtieth year in constant attendance upon the Qāḍī S̲h̲aik̲h̲ al-Islām b. Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Wahhāb (Qāḍī i Las̲h̲kar ah 1086/1675–6–1094/1683, d. at Aḥmadābād ah 1109/1697–8). Subsequently he was in the service of S̲h̲ajāʿat K̲h̲ān (Governor of Gujrāt ah 1098/1686–7, d. 1113/1701–2), by whom he was made Amīn in Jōd’hpūr. For a service rendered to the Imperial Court he was rewarded with a command of 250 men and a jāgīr at Meerut.
- Futūḥāt i ʿĀlamgīrī, a history of Aurangzēb to the 34th year of his reign ah 1101–2/1690–1: Rieu i 269a (ah 1246/1830), Edinburgh 218.
Description with a life of Īsar Dās: An old Hindu historian of Aurangzēb (in Jadunath Sarkar’s Studies in Mughal India (Calcutta and Cambridge 1919) pp. 242–9).
English translation: see J. Sarkar op. cit. p. 242 (“I have made a full translation of it into English, which I intend to publish”).
[Autobiographical statements (for which see Rieu and especially Sarkar op. cit.]
¶ § 749. S̲h̲. Raʾfat (a nephew of M. Sanāʾī (Rieu) or M. Sunnā [sic] K̲h̲ān (Bānkīpūr viii p. 100), or M. T̲h̲anā K̲h̲ān (Bodleian 395, no. 3001) “Waḥs̲h̲at” Kas̲h̲mīrī) refers in his Futūḥāt i ʿĀlamgīrī to an unfinished work of his entitled Āʾīnah i jahān-numā on the contest of Aurangzēb’s sons for the throne.
- Futūḥāt i ʿĀlamgīrī, a rhetorical account of the victories of Aurangzēb, written after his death: Rieu iii 1036a (abstract only, from the unique copy belonging to ʿAlī M. Jhajharī. ad 1851).
§ 750. Bhīm-Sēn son of Rag’hū-Nandan-Dās, a Kāyat’h (i.e. Kāyast’ha), was born at Burhānpūr in the year 175 of the Vikramī era (ad 1648–9) which he equates with S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s 23rd regnal year. He served in the Deccan wars of Aurangzēb’s time under Rāo Dalpat,4 a Būndēlah chieftain in Aurangzēb’s service, and was for a time commandant of the fort of Naldrug. After the defeat and death of Kām-bak̲h̲s̲h̲ (ah 1120/1709) he left the service and retired to Burhānpūr.
- Dilgus̲h̲ā (Tārīk̲h̲ i dilgus̲h̲ā or Nusk̲h̲ah i dilgus̲h̲ā), completed ah 1120/1708–9, an account, based mainly on personal recollections, of military transactions in the Deccan from Aurangzēb’s march to Āgrah (ah 1068/1658) to the defeat of Kām-bak̲h̲s̲h̲ (ah 1120/1709): Rieu i 271a (ah 1140/1728), Blochet i 602 (late 18th cent.), Ethé 445 (defective, “only going down to about the thirtieth year of ʿĀlamgīr’s reign, ah 1089 (ad 1687)”).
Abridged English translation (made from the b.m. ms.): Ferishta’s History of Dekkan … with a continuation from other native writers, of the events in that part of India … By Jonathan Scott, Shrewsbury 1794°*, Yol. ii pp. 3–123.5
Description with a life of Bhīm Sēn: A great Hindu memoir writer (in Jadunath Sarkar’s Studies in Mughal India (Calcutta and Cambridge 1919) pp. 231–41).
[Autobiographical statements (for which see Rieu and especially Sarkar op. cit.).]
§ 751. Mīrzā Nūr al-Dīn6 M. “‘Ālī” b. Ḥakim Fatḥ al-Dīn S̲h̲īrāzī belonged to a medical family of S̲h̲īrāz. If not born in India,7 he spent most of his life ¶ there. According to his own statement in the Bahādur-S̲h̲āh-nāmah (cited by Rieu, i p. 272a, where the passage is said to occur on fol. 44 of the b.m. ms. Or. 24) he entered the government service in S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s reign. According to the K̲h̲izānah i ʿāmirah (p. 3441) he was for a period in Aurangzēb’s reign Superintendent (Dārōg̲h̲ah) of the Royal Kitchen (Bāwarc̲h̲ī-k̲h̲ānah) with the title Niʿmat K̲h̲ān (conferred upon him in 1104/1692–3 according to the prose preface to his dīwān. See Sprenger p. 328). At the end of the reign he was Keeper of the Crown Jewels (Dārōg̲h̲ah i Jawāhir-k̲h̲ānah), with the title of Muqarrab K̲h̲ān, and, as he tells us himself (Bahādur-S̲h̲āh-nāmah, loc. cit.), he kept the jewels at Gwalior during the warfare which followed Aurangzēb’s death and delivered them to Bahādur-S̲h̲āh on his accession. He then received the title Dānis̲h̲mand K̲h̲ān and was ordered to write the official history of the reign.8 According to the Tārīk̲h̲ i Muḥammadī9 he died at Delhi10 on 1 Rabīʿ al-Awwal 1122/30 April 1710.11
“ ʿĀlī” is famous as a satirist and wit. The Waqāʾiʿ, which is the best known of his satirical compositions, is still popular in India among those who read Persian.
His dīwān has been published (without the prose preface) at [Lucknow] in 1881° and at Cawnpore in 1894*; the Ḥusn u ʿIs̲h̲q, an imitation of “Fattāḥī’s” Ḥusn u Dil, at [Cawnpore] in 1259/1843*, at S̲h̲āhjahānābād [i.e. Delhi] in 1844°, at [Bombay?] in 1265/1849* (preceded by the Waqāʾiʿ), at [Lucknow] in [1783°] and at Lucknow in 1899°; and the Ruqaʿāt u Muḍḥikāt at Lucknow in 1261/1845°*.
Other works of his, such as the Rāḥat al-qulūb, satirical sketches of some contemporaries, and the Risālah i Hajw i ḥukamāʾ, a satire on physicians, are described in Ethé 1659–62, Rieu ii 744b, 796a, 850b, Bodleian 1157, 1159, and elsewhere. For the Bahādur-S̲h̲āh-nāmah see p. 471 infra.
- Rūz-nāmah i waqāʾiʿ i aiyām i muḥāṣarah i dār al-jihād Ḥaidarābād, usually called Waqāʾiʿ i Ḥaidarābād, or Waqāʾiʿ i Niʿmat K̲h̲ān i ʿĀlī, or Waqāʾiʿ i Gulkundah, a facetious and satirical account of Aurangzēb’s siege of Ḥaidarābād ah 1097/1686 in mixed prose and verse: Edinburgh 375 ii ¶ (11th cent, h.), 82, Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib., (ah 1131/1718–19. See Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii, no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926), p. 54), Ethé 1663 (ah 1135/1723), 1659 ii (collated ah 1136/1723–4), 1664 (ah 1152/1739), 1665 (seal dated ah 1190/1776), 1661 i (ah 1191/1777), 1660 iv (n.d.), 1662 ii (n.d.), 1666 (ah 1207/1792), 1667 (n.d.), 1668 (n.d.), Rieu ii 745a (ah 1151/1738), 858a (ad 1782), 796a (18th cent.), 859a (1st pt. only. 18th cent.), 819 (ad 1819), 854b (ah 1248/1832), 850b (ah 1250/1835), i 268a (19th cent.), 268b (19th cent.), Lindesiana p. 204 no. 131a (circ. ad 1740), no. 780 (?) (ah 1236/1820–1), no. 792f (?) (circ. ad 1795), Eton 198 (ah 1187/1773–4), Bānkīpūr Suppt. ii 2194 (ah 1195/1781), 2258 (ah 1222/1807), 2329 (ah 1222/1807), 2315 (ah 1248/1833), 2219 (ah 1273/1856), Bānkīpūr iii 370 iv (19th cent.), 371 (19th cent.), 878 vi, ix 1098 xviiic, Bodleian 1157 (5) (n.d.), 1159 (1) (ah 1209/1795), 1160 (defective), Oxford Ind. Inst. ms. Pers. A. iv 21 (n.d.), Āṣafīyah i p. 258 nos. 546 (n.d.), 587 (ah 1212/1797–8), p. 260 nos. 752 (ah 1257/1841), 773 (ah 1212/1797–8), Blochet i 599 (18th cent.), iv 2326 (18th cent.), Ivanow 826 (4) (late 18th cent.), 1st Suppt. 778 (ah 1233/1817), 816 (28), Ivanow Curzon 111 (late 18th cent.), 112 (ah 1236/1821), 709 (circ. ad 1845), Bombay Univ. 28 (ah 1225/1810), ʿAlīgaṛh Subḥān Allāh mss. p. 57 no. 954 (2) (ah 1244/1828–9), p. 58 no. 6 (ah 1229/1814), Rehatsek p. 99 no. 53 (ah 1237/1821–2), Berlin 513, Madras (2 copies), Majlis 622 (4), Vollers 986 (1) (? “Geschichte der Kämpfe des Aurangzīb”).12
Editions: [India] 1248/1832–3 (together with the Ḥusn u ʿIs̲h̲q. See Rieu i 268b), 1265/1849*, [1849 ?*], [Lucknow] 1260/1844° (with marginal notes by Maqbūl Aḥmad Gōpāmau’ī13), 1264/1848°* (with M.A.’s notes), Lucknow 1859° (with M.A.’s notes), [place ?] 1261/1845 (Āṣafīyah i p. 260 no. 801), [place ?] 1270/1853–4 (Āṣafīyah i p. 260 no. 258), Cawnpore 1869*, 1870° (with M.A.’s notes), 1878°* (with different notes), 1884†, 1901†, Calcutta 1915 (ed. Otto Rothfeld. See jras. 1916 p. 201).
Description: Elliot and Dowson History of India vii pp. 200–1.
Commentaries: (1) S̲h̲arḥ i aḥadīyah bar Waqāʾiʿ i Muḥammadīyah, by ʿAbd Allāh: Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (ah 1300/1883. See Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii, no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926), p. 55), (2) Māʾidat al-fawāʾid, by G̲h̲ulām-Mak̲h̲dūm, Mudarris in the Hoogly Madrasah: Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (ah 1236/1821. See Oriental College Magazine, loc. cit.).
- Jang-nāmah, an account of Aurangzēb’s war against the Mahārāṇā of Udaipūr and of the hostilities between Bahādur S̲h̲āh and M. Aʿẓam S̲h̲āh after his death: Ivanow Curzon 162 v (late 18th cent. ?), Ivanow ¶ 1st Suppt. 761 (early 19th cent.), Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (ah 1261/1845. See Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii, no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926), p. 55), Āṣafīyah i p. 236 no. 767 (ah 1271/1854–5), ʿAlīgaṛh Subḥān Allāh mss. p. 58 nos. 5 and 16, Bānkīpūr xvii 1716 (19th cent.), Rieu iii 1049b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850).
Editions: Lucknow 1259/1843*, 1261/1845° (two editions ?), 1899†, Cawnpore 1279/1862°, 1877*, 1297/1880°*, 1884†, 1896†.
English translations: (1) An English translation of Niamat Khan Ali’s Jang Nama. With a concise and comprehensive substance of the book and a short sketch of the author’s life by Chandra Loll Gupta and Angan Lall Varma. Āgrah, 1909°. (2) A faithful English translation of Jang Namah of Nimat Khan-i-Ali with a glossary of difficult words and phrases, references to allusions, &c., By M. Baij Nath, Figar. Lucknow 1928*.
English abstract: b.m. ms. Add. 30,779, foll. 200–48.
Description: Elliot and Dowson History of India vii p. 202.
[Hamīs̲h̲ah bahār (Sprenger p. 127); Safīnah i K̲h̲wus̲h̲gū (Bānkīpūr viii p. 91); K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān ii 33817; Riyāḍ al-s̲h̲uʿarāʾ; Tad̲h̲kirah i Ḥusaini; Majmaʿ al-nafāʾis; Yad i baiḍāʾ; Sarw i Āzād; Dīwān i muntak̲h̲ab (Sprenger p. 151); K̲h̲izānah i ʿāmirah pp. 333–46 (no. 82); Kēwal Rām Tad̲h̲kirat al-umarāʾ, Tārīk̲h̲ i Muḥammadī (Rieu iii 895) fol. 245; Mak̲h̲zan al-g̲h̲arāʾib no. 1675; Nag̲h̲mah i ʿandalīb; Riyāḍ al-afkār (Bānkīpūr Suppt. i p. 56); Sprenger pp. 127, 151, 328; Elliot and Dowson vii p. 200; Rieu i 267, ii 703a, iii 1049 (the b.m. ms. Or. 2054 contains extracts relating to Niʿmat K̲h̲ān from several of the works mentioned above); Ency. Isl. under Niʿmat K̲h̲ān (Berthels).]
§ 752. M. Sāqī entitled Mustaʿidd K̲h̲ān was brought up by Bak̲h̲tāwar K̲h̲ān (see p. 102 supra), whom he served as Muns̲h̲ī and Dīwān, and, in the last seventeen years of his life, assisted in the composition of the Mirʾāt al-ʿālam. After Bak̲h̲tāwar K̲h̲ān’s death he entered the Imperial service with a manṣab, and held the offices of Waqāʾiʿ-nigār, Mus̲h̲rif of the Naqqās̲h̲-k̲h̲ānah (ah 1095/1684), Mus̲h̲rif of the Jā-namāz-k̲h̲ānah (ah 1097/1683–4), Mus̲h̲rif of the K̲h̲awāṣṣān (ah 1110/1698), and Muns̲h̲ī i Naẓārat (ah 1113/1701). In the reign of Bahādur S̲h̲āh he was requested by his patron ʿInāyat Allāh K̲h̲ān b. Mīrzā S̲h̲ukr Allāh to compile a history of the forty years of Aurangzēb’s reign which, owing to the prohibition of historical writing, were not included in the ʿĀlamgīr-nāmah. He died at Delhi on 20 S̲h̲awwāl 1136/1724 at the age of seventy-five.
- Maʾāt̲h̲ir i ʿĀlamgīrī (a chronogram = 1122/1710–11, the date of completion), a history of the reign of Aurangzēb, the first ten years (a later addition) being an abridgment of the ʿĀlamgīr-nāmah: Lindesiana p. 199 no. 446 (ah 1136/1723–4), Būhār 76 (ah 1138/1725), Edinburgh 216 ¶ (ah 1145/1732), 217, 411 (ah 1161/1748), Blochet i 600 (ah 1147/1734), 601 (ah 1148/1735), Ethé 365 (ah 1154/1741), 366 (n.d.), 367 (ah 1211/1796), 368 (defective), 369 (extracts only. ah 1148/1735), i.o. D.P. 760a (first ten years only. ah 1219/1804), Ivanow 164 (ah 1154/1741–2), 165 (late 18th cent.), 166 (late 18th or early 19th cent.), Berlin 492 (ah 1155/1742), Eton 189 (ah 1180/1766–7), Rieu i 270a (18th cent.), 271a (18th cent.), 271a (18th cent.), iii 936b (18th cent.), 936b (ah 1188/1774), 936b (ah 1221/1806), 937a (19th cent.), Bānkīpūr vii 578 (lacks 1st ten years. ah 1202/1787), Suppt. 1767 (defective. ah 1221/1806–7), r.a.s. 136 = Morley 132 (ah 1230/1814), Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (1st ten years. See Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii, no. 4 (Lahore, August 1926), p. 54), Bodleian 247, Mehren 60, 61.
Editions: Calcutta 1870–3°* (ed. Āg̲h̲ā Aḥmad ʿAlī. Bibliotheca Indica), Āgrah 1873†.
Text and translation of years i–x: The History of the first ten years of the reign of Alemgeer. Written … by Mohammed Sakee. Translated by H. Vansittart. Calcutta 1785°*.
Description and 14 pp. of translated extracts: Elliot and Dowson History of India vii 181–97.
[Maʾāthir i ʿĀlamgīrī preface and pp 254, 255, 278, 407, 462; Tārīkh i Muḥammadī (Rieu iii 895) fol. 256; Rieu i 270, iii 1083b; Ency. Isl. under Mustaʿidd K̲h̲ān.]
§ 753. Of the three recorded manuscripts which contain Ṣādiq K̲h̲ān’s S̲h̲āh-Jahān-nāmah (see p. 453 supra) two (namely the Elliot MS. Or. 1671 (Rieu iii 1008b) in the British Museum and the Rāmpūr MS.) contain also a prefaceless history of Aurangzēb’s reign which to a large extent agrees closely with the corresponding part of K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān’s history but which speaks of S̲h̲āh-ʿĀlam (Bahādur S̲h̲āh) as the reigning sovereign and must therefore have been written about twenty years earlier than [the completion of] the Muntak̲h̲ab al-lubāb (see p. 368 supra). To Rieu it seemed highly probable that it was an early draft of K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān’s account of Aurangzēb’s reign, but Professor Sri Ram Sharma has recently examined the Rāmpūr MS. and has been led to a different conclusion. In an article entitled A new [?] contemporary history Aurangzēb’s reign, which he published in the jras. for 1936, pp. 279–83, he states14 that the author mentions his name in several places and that he is Abū ʼl-Faḍl Maʿmūrī.
A certain Mīr Abū ʼl-Faḍl Maʿmūrī served for many years with the kūmakīs in the Deccan during S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s reign and won the esteem and friendship of successive Governors, including Aurangzēb. When the latter encamped at ¶ the Narbadah on his northward march to claim the succession to S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s throne, Abū ʼl-Faḍl’s manṣab was increased to 1000/400.15 After the victory over Jaswant it was raised to 1500/500 and he received the title of Maʿmūr K̲h̲ān. Shortly afterwards he was murdered by the disgruntled general Najābat K̲h̲ān, to whom he had been sent with a message from Aurangzēb (see K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān ii pp. 471–7, 1111–2; Maʾāt̲h̲ir al-umarāʾ iii pp. 5062–4, 82613–15).
Evidently, therefore, the history of Aurangzēb’s reign cannot have been written by him. It is conceivable that at a later period there may have been another official bearing the name Abū ʼ-Faḍl Maʿmūrī, but judgment must be suspended until more evidence is available. The autobiographical details which Professor Sri Ram Sharma has found in the history may eventually lead to the identification of the author. “Early in Aurangzēb’s reign,” says Professor Sharma, “he seems to have been appointed Darog̲h̲a-i-Buyūtāt which office he occupied for thirty years till the thirty-sixth year of Aurangzēb’s reign. Towards the end of the year 25 he was appointed Waqa’-Nawīs [sic] of Burhānpūr to hold it along with his old appointment as a Mīr-i-Sāmān. In the year 1686 he was sent to the army commanded by Prince A’zam with some important instructions. In the year 36 of Aurangzēb’s reign, he was appointed Mīr-i-Bahr. He seems to have either continued in the department of Buyūtāt or was again reverted thereto, as we find him visiting the army besieging Panhāla with certain important papers in the year 44. In the year 46 he was employed as a negotiator on behalf of the besieging Mughal commanders to settle the terms of surrender with Parśrāma, the commander of the fort of Khelna, which they were besieging. He seems to have survived Aurangzēb.”
- History of Aurangzēb’s reign, beginning abruptly in the year 1068 and agreeing to a large extent with K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān’s account: Rieu iii 1008b (a.h. 1244/1829), Rāmpūr (modern. See jras. 1936, p. 281).
§ 754. ʿInāyat Allāh K̲h̲ān b. Mīrzā S̲h̲ukr Allāh Kas̲h̲mīrī was born in Kas̲h̲mīr in 1063/1653 (Tārīk̲h̲ i Muḥammadī (B.M. MS. Or. 1824 = Rieu iii 895) fol. 260. Cf. Rieu iii 1083b ad 270b). He became Waqāʾiʿ-nigār in the 28th year of Aurangzēb’s reign, a k̲h̲ān in the 35th year, Dīwān i Tan in the 36th and Dīwān i K̲h̲āliṣah in the 45th. In Jahāndār S̲h̲āh’s reign he was appointed Nāẓim of Kas̲h̲mīr. In Farruk̲h̲-siyar’s reign he was Dīwān i K̲h̲āliṣah, Dīwān i Tan and also Ṣubāh-dār of Kas̲h̲mīr, the last office being administered by a deputy. In the time of Muḥammad S̲h̲āh he was Mīr-Sāmān and for a time deputy Wazīr. He died at Delhi on 7 Rabīʿ i 1138/1725 (according to the Tārīk̲h̲ i Muḥammadī, cited ¶ in Rieu iii 1083b ad 270b) or in 1139/1726–7 (according to the Maʾāt̲h̲ir al-umarāʾ i p. 8315).
According to the Maʾāt̲h̲ir al-umarāʾ ii 83116 ʿInāyat Allāh K̲h̲ān Kas̲h̲mīrī made a collection of royal orders issued through him and addressed to the princes and amīrs. To this collection he gave the title Aḥkām i ʿĀlamgīrī, and, according to the Maʾāt̲h̲ir al-umarāʾ, it was a well-known (mutadāwal) work, like his other compilation, the Kalimāt i ṭaiyibāt,17 a collection of letters written by Aurangzēb himself. At the present time there are only a few recorded manuscripts bearing the title Aḥkām i ʿĀlamgīrī. One of these (i.o. 3887) begins with a short preface,18 in which ʿInāyat Allāh says that for some years it had been his duty to write orders on behalf of Aurangzēb to the royal princes, to sulṭāns and amīrs and that after Aurangzēb’s death he had collected these and given them the title Aḥkām i ʿĀlamgīrī.
- Aḥkām i ʿĀlamgīrī (beginning of preface: Baʿd i ḥamd i nā-maḥdūd … wāḍiḥ bād kih faqīr ʿInāyat Allāh …; heading of first ḥukm: Ba-janāb i muqaddas i ḥaḍrat i Bāds̲h̲āh i K̲h̲uld-Ārām-gāh …; beginning of first ḥukm: Dar-īn-wilā az nawis̲h̲tah i M. Aslam K̲h̲ān maʿrūḍ i pīs̲h̲-gāh i falak-iʿtilā gardīd …), a collection of letters19 from Aurangzēb to his sons and various officials: Bānkīpūr Suppt. ii 2017 (19th year of M. S̲h̲āh (ah 1149/1736–7), i.o. 3887 (= Irvine 469. Transcribed from the preceding ms. in 1909. Described on fol. 1a as ḥiṣṣah i awwal, but there seems to be nothing to show definitely how much of the work is contained in the volume).
The collection of anecdotes incorporating orders of Aurangzēb which has been published by Sir Jadunāt’h Sarkār under the title Aḥkām i ¶ ʿĀlamgīrī is different from the work, or the part of it, described above. According to Sarkār (introduction p. 32) the work published by him is “the Ahkam-i-Alamgiri, attributed20 to the pen of Hamiduddin Khan (surnamed Nimchah-i-Alamgiri), whose life is given in the Masir [sic]-ul-umara, i. 605–611. But of this authorship there is no proof, and none of the three mss. bears his name”.
- Aḥkām i ʿĀlamgīrī (?), beginning D̲h̲ū ’l-Faqār K̲h̲ān Bahādur Nuṣrat-Jang dar waqtī kih az fatḥ i Jinjī āmadah,21 a collection of anecdotes incorporating the orders issued by Aurangzēb in respect of the circumstances narrated: i.o. 4071 (= Irvine 340. 19th cent.), 3987 (= Irvine 252. Transcribed in 1898 from the preceding ms.), 3388 (a fragment. See Sarkār’s introduction, p. 32), Rāmpūr Nawwāb ʿAbd al-Salām K̲h̲ān (see Sarkār’s introduction, pp. 32–3).
Edition: Ahkam-i-Alamgiri (Anecdotes of Aurangzib). Persian text [rearranged], with an English translation, notes and a Life of Aurangzib, by Jadunath Sarkar … Aḥkām i ʿĀlamgīrī taṣnīf i Ḥamīd al-Dīn K̲h̲ān Nīmc̲h̲ah i ʿĀlamgīrī maʿah tarjamah u tafsīr …, Calcutta 1912‡.
English translation: see Edition above. The same translation, without the Persian text, was published in a volume entitled Anecdotes of Aurangzib and historical essays by Jadunath Sarkar at Calcutta in 1912* and 1925* (2nd ed., revised).
§ 755. Other works relating to Aurangzēb:
- ʿAin al-jinān, or Waqāʾiʿ i Nawwāb K̲h̲ān dar las̲h̲kar i Aurangzēb, in mixed prose and verse: Browne Suppt. 878.
- Aurang-nāmah, “A poem by ‘Haqīrī’ (a Roz-bihānī soldier posted in Bengal), often agrees with Ma‘sūm; ends with execution of Dārā”: Āṣafiyah i p. 220 no. 603 (ah 1196/1782. See The Cambridge History of India, iv p. 582, from which the above description (by Sarkar) is quoted).
- Detailed history of Delhi, particulars of the Emperors’ movements, lists of manṣabs, etc. from the time of Aurangzēb to that of Farruk̲h̲-siyar, with a summary account of preceding reigns: Lahore Panjāb Univ. Lib. (see Oriental College Magazine, vol. ii no. 4 (Aug. 1926) p. 58 no. 70).
- Guls̲h̲an,22 by M. Ṣāliḥ. “Dated 1070 by the author”: Eton 190.
- ¶ Iftitāḥ i sulṭānī, a poetical account of Prince Aurangzēb’s war with the Uzbaks and Nad̲h̲r M. K̲h̲ān, the ruler of Balk̲h̲, written in 1057/1647 by “ʿAlawī” or “ʿUIwī”: Būhār 394 (ah 1150/1737–8).
- Naṣāʾiḥ of Aurangzēb to his sons and officials: Berlin 82 (5)(ah 1199/1784–5).
- Naẓm al-mulūk, a mat̲h̲nawī giving a history of India from the accession of Aurangzēb to the reign of Farruk̲h̲-siyar: Rieu iii 1056b (extracts only. Circ. ad 1850).
- Sāʿāt i nahḍat i ʿĀlamgīr Pāds̲h̲āh, time-table of Aurangzēb’s marches from 3 Rabīʿ ii 1066 to 4 Jumādā ii in the 34th (36th ?) regnal year, ah 1103: Blochet i 703 foll. 107–16 (cf. Ency. Isl. Awrangzēb, bibliography. 19th cent.), Edinburgh 223.
- Short extract dealing with Aurangzēb’s expeditions against Jaswant Singh: Ivanow Curzon 697 (19th cent.).
- Short life of Aurangzēb (beginning Sipās i bī-qiyās i Jāʿilī Waḥīd) written apparently in the latter half of the 18th century: Blochet i 603 (late 18th cent.).
- Tārīk̲h̲ i ʿĀlamgīrī, by ʿAbd al-Ḥaiy: Āṣafīyah i p. 226 no. 764.
- Tārīk̲h̲ i ʿĀlamgīrī, by Aḥmad-Qulī Ṣafawī: ʿAlīgaṛh Subḥ. mss. p. 58 no. 9.
- Titles of the princes and amīrs of Aurangzēb’s reign: Rieu iii 995a (circ. ad 1850).
- Waqāʾiʿ i Dak’han, an account of events in the Deccan in S̲h̲āh-Jahān’s reign: Blochet i 620 (18th cent.), Āṣafīyah i p. 258 no. 417 (ah 1287/1870–1).
- Wāsiṭat al-ʿiqd, by Mīr M. Faḍl, “on the events of his own time (Aurungzīb’s reign)”: Lindesiana p. 193 no. 793 (ah 1114/1702).
- Waṣīyat-nāmah: Rieu ii 799a iv, iii 1007a, i.o. D.P. 898, Ivanow 935(3).
- Unidentified history of Aurangzēb: Caetani 33 (ornate ms.).
§ 756. For the Muntak̲h̲ab al-lubāb of K̲h̲āfī K̲h̲ān see pp. 368–370 supra.
For S̲h̲. M. Murād’s history of Aurangzēb and his successors to the 21st year of Muḥammad S̲h̲āh’s reign see p. 479 infra.
^ Back to text2. For a summary of this continuation and two long extracts see Jadunath Sarkar’s articles in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 1906 pp. 257–67 (Shāista K̲h̲ān in Bengal (1664–66)) and 1907 pp. 405–18 (The Conquest of Chatgaon, 1666 A.D.) and 419–25 (The Feringi pirates of Chatgaon, 1665 A.D.). The articles were reprinted by Sarkar in his Studies in Mughal India (Calcutta and Cambridge 1919).
^ Back to text5. Aurangzebe’s operations in Dekhan [being “a free translation of a Journal kept by a Bondela officer, who attended Dulput Roy, the chief of his tribe, in all Aurangzebe’s campaigns, which was presented to me by the Raja of Dutteah, a great grandson of Dulput Roy”].
^ Back to text7. According to the Safīnah i K̲h̲wus̲h̲gū (Bānkīpūr viii p. 91) he “was originally from Mas̲h̲had” and “after performing the pilgrimage, he came to India in the middle of ʿĀlamgīr’s reign [sic, but we know from his own statement, if Rieu has correctly reported it, that he entered the government service in the time of S̲h̲āh-Jahān]. According to the K̲h̲izānah i ʿāmirah (p. 343 penult.) Ḥakīm Fatḥ al-Dīn came to India and, “they say” (gūyand), Mīrzā M. was born in India, went in his childhood (dar sig̲h̲ar i sinn) to S̲h̲īrāz with his father, was educated there and returned to India, where he entered the service of Aurangzēb. Cf. Riyāḍ al-afkār (Bānkīpūr Suppt. i p. 57), which is probably dependent on the K̲h̲izānah i ʿāmirah.
^ Back to text11. This precise date is probably correct, but other dates are given elsewhere, 1120 (Hamīs̲h̲ah bahār), 1121 (Dīwān i muntak̲h̲ab. Sprenger p. 151, K̲h̲izānah i ʿāmirah p. 3443) and 1123 (Safīnah i K̲h̲wus̲h̲gū).
^ Back to text16. K̲h̲uld-Makān ins̲h̲ā u imlā i ū rā mī-pasandīd. Aḥkāmī kih ba-wasāṭat i ū ba-nām i pāds̲h̲āh-zādahā u umarā ṣudūr yāftah farāham kardah ba-Aḥkām i ʿĀlamgīrī mausūm sāk̲h̲tah. U s̲h̲uqqahā i dastk̲h̲aṭṭī i pāds̲h̲āh nīz jamʿ kardah Kalimāt i ṭaiyibāt nām gud̲h̲ās̲h̲tah. Har dū nusk̲h̲ah mutadāwal ast.
^ Back to text17. In view of the fact that i.o. 3887 was, according to W. Irvine’s note on a fly-leaf, transcribed from a manuscript in the Bānkīpūr Public Library [evidently identical with no. 2017 in ʿAbd al-Muqtadir’s Supplement, vol. ii], it is surprising to learn from ʿAbd al-Muqtadir’s description that “The ms. is defective towards the beginning, and neither the editor’s name, nor the title of the work, is given in the work…. The copy, without a preface, opens abruptly thus with a letter to S̲h̲âh ‘Âlam Bahâdur S̲h̲âh before his accession to the throne:—Dar-īn-wilā az nawis̲h̲tah i Muḥammad Aslam K̲h̲ān …” Evidently the preface has disappeared since 1909, when the manuscript was copied, unless the copyist supplied it from some other source.
^ Back to text19. These are actually letters, or extracts from letters, and quite different from the collection published by Sarkār, which, as stated below, consists of anecdotes or brief historical narratives leading up to the orders issued by Aurangzēb in respect of the circumstances narrated.