The Nāṣirī Generations 237.10

237.10

ceded the tardy justice of decreeing, that, in virtue of his good works, Ghiyas-ud-din ’Awz [’Iwaz ?] should in his grave, be endowed with that coveted title of Sultan, which had been denied to him while living.” Who denied it to him? Minhaj-ud-Din, even at page 163 of the Calcutta “Official Text,” does not say so. What he did say will be found literally rendered at page 587 of this Translation. Sultan Ghiyas-ud-Din, ’Iwaz, was equally as much entitled to the coveted title of Sultan as his adversary, I-yal-timish, was. He had been chosen precisely in the same way, by the chief men of the country, he owed no fealty whatever to Dihli or its sovereigns, was a Turk like his rival, what is more, was a free-born man, and not a manumitted slave—the slave of a slave—which I-yal-timish, was, and was included among the great Maliks of Sultan Mu’izz-ud-Din, Muhammad-i-Sam, master of I-yal-timish’s master. These erroneous ideas respecting the two Sultans I have felt myself bound to correct, according to historical facts, and our author’s statements. I would also remark, en passant, that Nasir-ud-Din, Kaba-jah, was not overcome by I-yal-timish until ten years after 614 H. See page 348 of “Initial Coinage of Bengal,” and page 542 of this Translation, and Printed Text, page 144.