Volume 1

The Tūzuk-i-Jahāngīrī, or, Memoirs of Jahāngīr ... / translated by Alexander Rogers .. ; edited by Henry Beveridge.

  • Jahangir, Emperor of Hindustan, 1569-1627.
Date:
1909-1914
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: The Tūzuk-i-Jahāngīrī, or, Memoirs of Jahāngīr ... / translated by Alexander Rogers .. ; edited by Henry Beveridge. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    472/504 (page 450)
    externals as the means of paying the dues of friendship (and so we must attend to them). Hence when at this auspicious time a province which had gone out of my (‘Abbas’s) possession has been settled by the exertions of angelic servants in accordance with the hopes of well-wishers, I (‘Abbas) have returned to the capital, and have despatched Kamalu-d-din, etc. p. 197, 1. 7. For Khankhanan read Edian. p. 197, 1. 12, The I.O. MSS. have a different reading here. They say nothing about three ratis. What they say is, “ At this time I had made some increase in the amounts of weights and measures. For instance, I added one-fourth {siwd'l) to the weight of the muhrs and rupees. ” The sih rati of text is a mistake for siwcCl. p. 197, 1. 12 from foot. I.O. MSS. have ‘Sunday in Safar,’ but they wrongly have 1022. p. 197, 1. 9 from foot. Both I.O. MSS. have ‘Neknahar’ instead of ‘ in the interior.’ p. 198, 1. 11. Or Lohgar. p. 205, 1. 14. I do not think that the translation ‘should not force Islam on anyone,’ or the version in Elliot, vi, 325, ‘ Not to forcibly impose Musulman burdens on anyone,’ gives the full force of the words takllf-i-Musalmdnl bar kasi nakunand. I think the reference clearly is to circumcision, and that the words takllf-i-Musalmdnl should be rendered ‘ the Muhammadan ceremonial,’ This explains why the injunction comes in immediately after the prohibitions against blinding and mutilation. It has been said, and I believe with truth, that the members of the Delhi royal family never were circumcised. Probably one reason for this was that in many instances they had Hindu mothers. As pointed out in Elliot, the passage is omitted in the Iqbal-nama. It also does not occur in the version given in ‘Ali Muhammad’s “History of Gujarat,” vol. i, p. 200 of lithograph. p. 214, verse. For red read a river. p. 216. See picture of a turkey in Havell’s “Indian Sculpture,” pp. 214-15. . p. 218, 1. 10 from foot. About Shapur see Ma’asiru-l-umara, i, 180. p. 224, n. 1. For infra read supra, pp. 27 and 30, note, p. 229, 11. 9 and 14. For Patna read Tatta. p. 229, note. For brother read brother’s son. p. 231, 1. 14 from foot. For Nihalpur substitute Thalner as in the MSS. The news of the death seems to have reached Agra very quickly, p. 232, 1. 1. Insert the word ‘ and ’ before ‘ allowed.’ p. 234, 1. 2 from foot. The word translated ‘ cranes ’ is kdrwdnak, and probably means ‘a little crane.’ In Blochmann, 63, karwdnak is rendered by ‘ stone-curlew.’ p. 234, 1. 5 from foot. The word seems to be kunji^k, ‘ sparrow,’ in the MSS., but probably it should be kunjak, ‘ a curiosity, a rarity.’ p. 235, 1. 2. It is Thursday, the 28th, in the MSS., and instead of ‘ night ’ we should read ‘ eve. ’ The English date corresponding to 28th Muliarram is 10th March, 1613. p. 237, 1. 8. It is 1,000 in the MSS., and this is probably correct, though B.M. MS. 1645 has changed the word for 1,000 into one for 100.