Скачать книгу

and they set an ālāchūq at each stage for me to sit in.665

      Though we had started with the intention of going into Khurāsān, yet with things as they were666 something was hoped for from the Ḥiṣār country and Khusrau Shāh’s retainers. Every few days some-one would come in from the country or a tribe or the (Mughūl) horde, whose words made it probable that we had growing ground for hope. Just then Mullā Bābā of Pashāghar came back, who had been our envoy to Khusrau Shāh; from Khusrau Shāh he brought nothing likely to please, but he did from the tribes and the horde.

      Three or four marches beyond Aīlāk, when halt was made at a place near Ḥiṣār called Khwāja ‘Imād, Muḥibb-‘alī, the Armourer, came to me from Khusrau Shāh. Through Khusrau Shāh’s territories I have twice happened to pass;667 renowned though he was for kindness and liberality, he neither time showed me the humanity he had shown to the meanest of men.

      As we were hoping something from the country and the tribes, we made delay at every stage. At this critical point Sherīm T̤aghāī, than whom no man of mine was greater, thought of leaving me because he was not keen to go into Khurāsān. He had sent all his family off and stayed himself unencumbered, when after the defeat at Sar-i-pul (906 AH.) I went back to defend Samarkand; he was a bit of a coward and he did this sort of thing several times over.

      (b. Bābur joined by one of Khusrau Shāh’s kinsmen.)

      After we reached Qabādīān, a younger brother of Khusrau Shāh, Bāqī Chaghānīānī, whose holdings were Chaghānīān,668 Shahr-i-ṣafā and Tīrmīẕ, sent the khatīb669 of Qarshī to me to express his good wishes and his desire for alliance, and, after we had crossed the Amū at the Aūbāj-ferry, he came himself to wait on me. By his wish we moved down the river to opposite Tīrmīẕ, where, without fear [or, without going over himself],670 he had their families671 and their goods brought across to join us. This done, we set out together for Kāhmard and Bāmīān, then held by his son672 Aḥmad-i-qāsim, the son of Khusrau Shāh’s sister. Our plan was to leave the households (awī-aīl) safe in Fort Ajar of the Kāhmard-valley and to take action wherever action might seem well. At Aībak, Yār-‘alī Balāl,673 who had fled from Khusrau Shāh, joined us with several braves; he had been with me before, and had made good use of his sword several times in my presence, but was parted from me in the recent throneless times674 and had gone to Khusrau Shāh. He represented to me that the Mughūls in Khusrau Shāh’s service wished me well. Moreover, Qaṃbar-‘alī Beg, known also as Qaṃbar-‘alī Silākh (Skinner), fled to me after we reached the Zindān-valley.675

      (c. Occurrences in Kākmard.)

      We reached Kāhmard with three or four marches and deposited our households and families in Ajar. While we stayed there, Jahāngīr Mīrzā married (Aī Begīm) the daughter of Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā and Khān-zāda Begīm, who had been set aside for him during the lifetime of the Mīrzās.676

      Meantime Bāqī Beg urged it upon me, again and again, that two rulers in one country, or two chiefs in one army are a source of faction and disorder – a foundation of dissension and ruin. “For they have said, ‘Ten darwīshes can sleep under one blanket, but two kings cannot find room in one clime.’

      If a man of God eat half a loaf,

      He gives the other to a darwīsh;

      Let a king grip the rule of a clime,

      He dreams of another to grip.”677

      Bāqī Beg urged further that Khusrau Shāah’s retainers and followers would be coming in that day or the next to take service with the Pādshāh (i. e. Bābur); that there were such sedition-mongers with them as the sons of Ayūb Begchīk, besides other who had been the stirrers and spurs to disloyalty amongst their Mīrzās,678 and that if, at this point, Jahāngīr Mīrzā were dismissed, on good and friendly terms, for Khurāsān, it would remove a source of later repentance. Urge it as he would, however, I did not accept his suggestion, because it is against my nature to do an injury to my brethren, older or younger,679 or to any kinsman soever, even when something untoward has happened. Though formerly between Jahāngīr Mīrzā and me, resentments and recriminations had occurred about our rule and retainers, yet there was nothing whatever then to arouse anger against him; he had come out of that country (i. e. Farghāna) with me and was behaving like a blood-relation and a servant. But in the end it was just as Bāqī Beg predicted; – those tempters to disloyalty, that is to say, Ayūb’s Yūsuf and Ayūb’s Bihlūl, left me for Jahāngīr Mīrzā, took up a hostile and mutinous position, parted him from me, and conveyed him into Khurāsān.

      (d. Co-operation invited against Shaibāq Khān.)

      In those days came letters from Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā, long and far-fetched letters which are still in my possession and in that of others, written to Badī‘u’z-zamān Mīrzā, myself, Khusrau Shāh and Ẕū’n-nūn Beg, all to the same purport, as follows: – “When the three brothers, Sl. Maḥmūd Mīrzā, Sl. Aḥmad Mīrzā, and Aūlūgh Beg Mīrzā, joined together and advanced against me, I defended the bank of the Murgh-āb680 in such a way that they retired without being able to effect anything. Now if the Aūzbegs advance, I might myself guard the bank of the Murgh-āb again; let Badī‘u’z-zamān Mīrzā leave men to defend the forts of Balkh, Shibarghān, and Andikhūd while he himself guards Girzawān, the Zang-valley, and the hill-country thereabouts.” As he had heard of my being in those parts, he wrote to me also, “Do you make fast Kāhmard, Ajar, and that hill-tract; let Khusrau Shāh place trusty men in Ḥiṣār and Qūndūz; let his younger brother Walī make fast Badakhshān and the Khutlān hills; then the Aūzbeg will retire, able to do nothing.”

      These letters threw us into despair; – for why? Because at that time there was in Tīmūr Beg’s territory (yūrt) no ruler so great as Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā, whether by his years, armed strength, or dominions; it was to be expected, therefore, that envoys would go, treading on each other’s heels, with clear and sharp orders, such as, “Arrange for so many boats at the Tīrmīz, Kilīf, and Kīrkī ferries,” “Get any quantity of bridge material together,” and “Well watch the ferries above Tūqūz-aūlūm,”681 so that men whose spirit years of Aūzbeg oppression had broken, might be cheered to hope again.682 But how could hope live in tribe or horde when a great ruler like Sl. Ḥusain Mīrzā, sitting in the place of Tīmūr Beg, spoke, not of marching forth to meet the enemy, but only of defence against his attack?

      When we had deposited in Ajar what had come with us of hungry train (aj aūrūq) and household (awī-aīl), together with the families of Bāqī Beg, his son, Muḥ. Qāsim, his soldiers and his tribesmen, with all their goods, we moved out with our men.

      (e. Increase of Bābur’s following.)

      One man after another came in from Khusrau Shāh’s Mughūls and said, “We of the Mughūl horde, desiring the royal welfare, have drawn off from T̤āīkhān (T̤ālīkān) towards Ishkīmīsh and Fūlūl. Let the Pādshāh advance as fast as possible, for the greater part of Khusrau Shāh’s force has broken up and is ready to take service with him.” Just then news arrived that Shaibāq Khān, after taking Andijān, Скачать книгу


<p>665</p>

The ālāchūq, a tent of flexible poles, covered with felt, may be the khargāh (kibitka); Persian chādar seems to represent Turkī āq awī, white house.

<p>666</p>

i. e. with Khusrau’s power shaken by Aūzbeg attack, made in the winter of 909 AH. (Shaibānī-nāma cap. lviii).

<p>667</p>

Cf. ff. 81 and 81b. The armourer’s station was low for an envoy to Bābur, the superior in birth of the armourer’s master.

<p>668</p>

var. Chaqānīān and Saghānīān. The name formerly described the whole of the Ḥiṣār territory (Erskine).

<p>669</p>

the preacher by whom the Khut̤ba is read (Erskine).

<p>670</p>

bī bāqī or bī Bāqī; perhaps a play of words with the double meaning expressed in the above translation.

<p>671</p>

Amongst these were widows and children of Bābur’s uncle, Maḥmūd (f. 27b).

<p>672</p>

aūghūl. As being the son of Khusrau’s sister, Aḥmad was nephew to Bāqī; there may be in the text a scribe’s slip from one aūghūl to another, and the real statement be that Aḥmad was the son of Bāqī’s son, Muḥ. Qāsim, which would account for his name Aḥmad-i-qāsim.

<p>673</p>

Cf. f. 67.

<p>674</p>

Bābur’s loss of rule in Farghāna and Samarkand.

<p>675</p>

about 7 miles south of Aībak, on the road to Sar-i-tāgh (mountain-head, Erskine).

<p>676</p>

viz. the respective fathers, Maḥmūd and ‘Umar Shaikh. The arrangement was made in 895 AH. (1490 AD.).

<p>677</p>

Gulistān cap. i, story 3. Part of this quotation is used again on f. 183.

<p>678</p>

Maḥmūd’s sons under whom Bāqī had served.

<p>679</p>

Uncles of all degrees are included as elder brethren, cousins of all degrees, as younger ones.

<p>680</p>

Presumably the ferries; perhaps the one on the main road from the north-east which crosses the river at Fort Murgh-āb.

<p>681</p>

Nine deaths, perhaps where the Amū is split into nine channels at the place where Mīrzā Khān’s son Sulaimān later met his rebel grandson Shāh-rukh (T̤abaqāt-i-akbarī, Elliot & Dowson, v, 392, and A.N. Bib. Ind., 3rd ed., 441). Tūqūz-aūlūm is too far up the river to be Arnold’s “shorn and parcelled Oxus”.

<p>682</p>

Shaibāq himself had gone down from Samarkand in 908 AH. and in 909 AH. and so permanently located his troops as to have sent their families to them. In 909 AH. he drove Khusrau into the mountains of Badakhshān, but did not occupy Qūndūz; thither Khusrau returned and there stayed till now, when Shaibāq again came south (fol. 123). See Sh. N. cap. lviii et seq.