The Nāṣirī Generations 245: SECTION XXIII. · THE AFFAIRS OF ISLAM, AND IRRUPTION OF THE INFIDELS.
Tabakat-i-Nasiri 245
- Language
- English
SECTION XXIII. · THE AFFAIRS OF ISLAM, AND IRRUPTION OF THE INFIDELS.
245.1
[As our author relates here the various prophecies respecting the end of the world, of which the irruption of the Mughals was one of the chief indications, I need scarcely follow him; since the world has not yet come to an end, although more than six centuries have elapsed since he foretold it, and closed his history, and, therefore, I may pass over these matters altogether, and begin where he commences his relation of events.] Notwithstanding that, by the will of the Almighty, and the decrees of Destiny, the turn of sovereignty passed unto the Chingiz Khan the Accursed, and his descendants, after the kings of I-ran and Turan, that the whole of the land of which works contains the history of the Mughals more for the purpose of glorifying the author’s master than anything else, as I shall presently show. I. Yafis, son of Nuh, from whom the Turks and all their ramifications claim descent, after coming out of the ark with his father, is said to have been sent, by him, into the farther east, and to have fixed his yurt or encampment, and to have pitched his tent, at a place written in the original—which is somewhat doubtful, in the vicinity of the rivers Atil—the Wolga, which rises in the country of Rus and Bulghar—and Jaik—. He received from his father the famous stone which possessed the virtue of producing rain and other blessings, which stone the Turks call yadak tash, the ’Ajamis, sang-i-yadah, and the ’Arabs hajar-al-matar—the rain-producing stone.
245.2
In after-times the descendants of Yafis casting lots for the possession of this miraculous stone, the Ghuzz, hereafter to be mentioned, are said to have made an imitation of it, and the Khalj tribe won the false stone, while the Ghuzz secured the real one. The author of the Habib-us-Siyar says it was preserved among the Uzbaks and Mughals, and possessed the same virtues when he wrote!
245.3
Yafis had eight sons:— 1. Turk— 2. Chin— 3. Kamari— 4. Saklab— [also Saklab], 5. Rus— [an ’Usmanli Turkish author, who lately published a work at Paris very correctly contends—according to the historians previously quoted, among whom the Fanakati says his work contains what the Sages, Astronomers, and Chroniclers of the I-ghurs, the people of Tibbat, and the tribes of the Turks relate in their chronicles—that the Russians are not Sclaves—i. e. Saklabs. See also Mascou’s History of the Germans, vol. ii. page 615]. 6. Mansag— also written Mansag—Manj— and Manshij— 7. Taraj— also written Tarakh—Barakh— and even Marakh—from the fourth son of whom is descended Sikandar-i-Zu-l-Karnain, not the Macedonian. 8. Gumari— [Gomer] also styled, by some of the writers quoted, Kimal or Gamal— and Gimal or Kimal— and Gimal or Kimial— [I may repeat here that I always put the most trustworthy names first, in all instances]. Some of these writers, and also the author of the Jami’-i-’Ulum, add the names of three more sons— Khalj— Ghuzz— and Sadkan— but the two first mentioned cannot be sons of Yafis, from what these writers themselves subsequently state respecting the origin of their names, presently to be noticed.
245.4
Some of the authorities mention the confusion of tongues, which necessitated the eight sons of Yafis separating, and they are mentioned as taking up their residence, with their families, in different parts of what they call Turkistan, and which, subsequently, were called after their respective names; but the others state that Nuh sent Yafis into the farther east, into Turan. II. Turk, the eldest son of Yafis, son of Nuh, took up his residence in that pleasant locality famous for its hot and cold springs, which the Turks call Salingae— and Salingae— which is also written Issik-Kol— Si-Kol— by some writers, but which, as subsequently explained, refers to the parts about Issik-Kol— or Issigh-Kol— or Issigh-Kol— k and gh being interchangeable. According to ’Abd-ullah-i-Khurdad-bih, and Abu-l-Ghazi, Bahadur Khan, "Salingae lies round about Issik-Kol, which is a little sea, or great lake, seven days’ journey in extent [about 120 miles long], surrounded by mountains, Turan and the East fell under the sway of the Mughals, and into which seventy rivers fall, but the lake is salt, and some say the water is warm.”
245.5
Chin, son of Yafis, was very clever, and inventive, and among other things invented by him was the custom of winding silk [from the cocoon], and weaving silken textures. He had a son whom he named Ma-Chin, who was exceedingly wise. When the latter’s family became numerous, he said to his father that he would construct a place of abode for himself, and he founded the city of Ma-Chin. He acquired the jade stone, and discovered its properties and virtues, and made it known to his people, and he also took musk from the musk-deer. Khurz, son of Yafis, was very mild, tractable, and taciturn, and, having roamed about in all directions, at length fixed his residence by the bank of the river Atil — اتل. In the summer season he dwelt [with his family] in the open country, and, in winter, in a town [شهر] — a fixed habitation, probably.
245.6
Saklab, son of Yafis, made some request to the chief of his ulus or tribe — one writer says, to Gumari, Khurz, and Rus, to be allowed to dwell with them — which was not granted, and, on this account, enmity arose between them. Others say, that the descendants of Saklab, having become much more numerous than the others, came to a fight with their kinsmen, but, being worsted, took up their residence in more distant parts, farther west, beyond the seventh clime, where the cold is great. They appear to have not only made up their feud in these latter days, A.D. 1876, but also, for political purposes, to have merged into one people. ’Abd-ullah-i-Khurdad-bih calls him Sag-lab — سگ لاب — and says that he was suckled by a bitch, hence the name, and which, if true, may account for the very Christian-like proclivities manifested lately by his simple-minded “Christian” descendants, so-called, in cutting off ears, lips, noses, and heads, and otherwise mutilating their dead foes, a very dog-like disposition. They — the Slavs of European writers — are notorious for such-like acts, as Tacitus and Procopius testify. Rus, son of Yafis, is the ancestor of the Rusians [Russians]. Being held in little account, and without sufficient means, he continued, for some time, to dwell along with Saklab, but, subsequently, left him. Among the descendants of Rus the custom prevails of giving the parents’ whole inheritance to the daughters, and nothing but a sword to the sons.
245.7
Maog, or Mansag, son of Yafis, was full of deceit and artifice, and he took up his dwelling on the side of Bulghar. There is the land of the Ghuzz, and the whole of that race are his descendants, from his son, named Ghuzz; and they are the worst of the descendants of Yafis. Some few writers say “the worst of the Turks,” but to be Turks they must have been descended from Turk, which does not appear to have been the case. After the decease of Yafis, Mansag managed to get possession of the rain-stone, and it remained with the Ghuzz, but, on one occasion, when Turk required it to bring rain, he sent and demanded the stone from them. They substituted a false one and sent it, which being discovered, strife arose, and numbers of the Ghuzz family were killed in consequence, and, from that time, enmity has continued between the Turks and Turk-mans. [See under Aghuz, farther on, for the origin of this name.] Ghuzz’s eldest son was killed in this affair. He was named Beghu — بيغو which is also written Beghun — بيغون — the n being nasal, and hence the Turk-mans style themselves Beghu. See note *, page 374, and note §, page 433. Gumari [Gomer of European historians] who is also called Kimal or Gimal and that the authority of the Muhammadan religion de-
245.8
and Kimari or Gimari and Gimāl, &c., as previously stated], son of Yāfis, was addicted to pleasure and jollity, and passionately fond of the chase: and he took up his residence in the part which is known as Bulghār. He had two sons, named Bulghār and Burtās. From the latter are descended the Burtās, whose name is sometimes written with the addition of iān—Burtāsiān, which, probably, is an error for Bāsjirdīān or Bāshghīrdīān, as the Bāshghīrds are of their seed. Burtās took up his quarters on the side of Bulghār, and the taking of furs is attributed to him. Bulghār is the ancestor of the Bulghārs, vulgarly Bulgarians, and therefore they are not Saḳlābs [Slavs]. Some historians are of opinion that the Yūnānīān, and Rūmīān [Ionians and Romans], are descended from Gūmarī, otherwise Kīmāl or Gīmāl, and that Yā-jūj and Mā-jūj [Gog and Ma-gog]—who, probably, are the ancestors of the Samoydes—were likewise sons of Gūmarī. No account whatever is given of the eighth son of Yāfis—Tāraj, Tārakh, or Tūrakh. This is the genealogy of the descendants of Yāfis, son of Nūḥ; but, as such as might be enumerated far exceed all computation, and, as the object of the writers was merely to give an account of the Turks, they give no further details respecting the other sons of Yāfis, but concentrate their attention on the movements of his eldest son, Turk.
245.9
Yāfis, son of Nūḥ, having died at the age of 250—some say 240—years, Turk was chosen head of his people; and they styled him Yāfis-Ughlān, or Yāfis the younger, and the country now called Turkistān took its name from him. He is said to have been contemporary with Gaiū-mart, the first of the Maliks of 'Ajam, and he was the first who pitched tents and dwelt in them, and made huts of reeds and grass. Another account states that Turk succeeded to the authority at a place named Silūk—and that he had four sons: 1. Tunag, or Tutag; 2. Chigal—[the name of a tribe, and of a city or town near Ṭirāz, and is now applied to a small tract of country]; 3. Barsinjār—and 4. Imlāḳ.
245.10
With one exception they state that, when his end drew near, Turk resigned his authority to his eldest son, whom they call Tunag or Tutag; for, as regards the names of his four sons, previously mentioned, all agree, except the Ḥabīb-us-Siyar, in some copies of which work Turk is given five sons, of whom Alminjah—is the eldest; but this, although apparently correct from what follows, is contrary to every other work here named, except Abū-l-Ghāzī's, which again is different to all. It is possible that Alminjah was a grandson of Turk, and son of one of the four named above. parted from those regions, which became the seat of Jalzah may be meant for Alinjah or the like, but I must mention that Abu-l-Ghazi is the most modern of all the authors I have referred to, he having only begun his History in 1074 H. = 1663 A.D., and that, in one place in his work, he states that he himself copied from other authors what is contained therein down to the time of his ancestor Shaibani Khan, the contemporary and enemy of Babar. Those authors must have been some of those whose works I have already named; but Abu-l-Ghazi differs from them essentially, and can scarcely be considered a better authority than those who centuries previously compiled the history of the descendants of Yafis by command of Mughal sovereigns, and from the best authorities. For the above reasons I must assume that Turk was succeeded by his grandson, Alminjah or Alinjah, possibly the son of Tutag or Tunag.
245.11
III. Alminjah or Alinjah having succeeded, during his chieftainship the whole of the Turk tribes forsook the true faith [of their ancestor Yafis] and turned pagans. When he became stricken in years he resigned the chieftainship to his son, Dib-bakue. IV. Dib-bakue also written Dib-badkue, Diba-kun and Dib-yakun and Dib-baukue the son of Alminjah or Alinjah, succeeded his father, and, in his chieftainship, all the Turks took the road of error and perversity. Dib signifies throne, grandeur, possession, and bakue, great, venerable, and the like. He had four sons. V. Kiwak also written Kiwak by some, Kyuk, and by two authors Kur, or Gur another son of Alminjah or Alinjah, but, according to some, his eldest son, succeeded to the chieftainship over the Turks. He became an idol-worshipper according to the Fanakati, who then makes a sudden leap to Aghuz Khan who does not belong to this dynasty at all. Others state however that Kiwak did not deviate from the just and virtuous path of his forefathers.
245.12
VI. I now come to a period respecting which all the authors named, with a single exception, to be referred to presently, agree, namely, that wherein Kiwak was succeeded by his son, Alinjah Khan, during whose chieftainship his people, filled with arrogance at their prosperity and flourishing condition, continued to fall deeper into darkness and perversity until they all became infidels. After a considerable time, two sons were born to him at one birth, to the eldest of whom he gave the name of Tattar and to the second the name of Mughal which is also written Mughal and Mughul but Mongol is wholly erroneous : I cannot imagine how it ever came to be adopted. When Alinjah became old and infirm, and his two sons had grown up, he divided his territory between them, giving to each a half, and retired from the world. The two brothers appear to have ruled jointly, and in harmony, for some time, but, eventually, separation took place between them, and two septs or tribes arose, which authors call by the Turkish words I-mak, I-magh and Ui-mak or Ui-magh. It may be well to mention another matter which occurs to me here, and, although it is not a necessary or very material part of the present subject, it can scarcely be deemed foreign to it.
245.13
Those Turks, Tattars, and Mughals who occupy at present the old seats of the Tajziks, between Hirat, Kabul, and Kandahar [“the Afghans of Ghor” as they were wont, until very lately, improperly to be styled, and who are said to have “founded the ‘pre-Mughal’ Patan dynasty of Hinpaganism, the kingdom of Hindustan, by the grace of Almighty God, and the favour of fortune, under the shadow III. Aminjah — and, by different authors, Alinjah — Balinjah — Malinjah — and without points — which may be anything; but Abu-l-Ghazi, contrary to all other writers, styles him Jalinzah [? He was succeeded by his son, IV. I-ley — whom some style Ansi or Insi — and Isley — and without diacritical points. Abu-l-Ghazi styles this ruler Itelah [?]. He was succeeded by his son, V. Atsiz — which is written in some of the works quoted Altur and Astir but they are evidently both intended for which is a well-known Turkish name. This however is a specimen of the manner in which careless copyists, ignorant of the subject copied, make correct names incorrect. Abu-l-Ghazi calls him Atasir or Atsir [?]. He was engaged in wars, but against whom is not recorded. Hostility had probably already arisen between the Tattar and Mughal I-maks. VI. Ardu or Urdu also written Ardah or Urdah son of Atsiz, succeeded to the authority, and, at his death, his son,
245.14
VII. Baidu — succeeded to the chieftainship. He was much superior to his predecessors in power and state. He marched his forces against the I-mak or Ulus of the Mughals, and hence commenced that inextinguishable hostility which has ever since existed between the two septs. Abu-l-Ghazi says he died whilst war was going on against the Mughals. VIII. Sunj Khan — and by some styled Sundz — son of Baidu, succeeded; but, before I say more concerning him, I must bring the Mughal I-mak down to his time.