Life and Conditions of the People of Hindustan (1200–1550 A.D.) c4.s2.t1.2

c4.s2.t1.2

The Tarikh-i-Fakhr-ud-din Mubarak Shah ; the Taj-ul-Ma'asir ; the Tabaqat-i-Nasiri ; the Tarikhi-i-Firuz Shahi of Ziya-ud-din Barani; the Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi of Shams-i-Siraj ‘Afif; the Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi; the Zafar-nama of ‘Ali Yazdi; the Waqi‘at-i-Mushtaqi (or the Tarikh-i-Mushtaqi); the Tarikh-i-Daudi; the Tarikh-i-Sher Shahi; the Memoirs of Timur, Babur, Jauhar, Gulbadan Begum, and Bayazid; the Humayunnama of Khvandmir; the Ain-i-Akbari, and the Akbarnama of Abu’l Fazal. Among general histories I have consulted the Tabaqat-i-Akbari; the Muntakhab-ut-Tawarikh; and the Tarikh-i-Firishta (or the Gulshan-i-Ibrahim). This enumeration is by no means complete, and it is hoped that more histories will come to light in course of time. There was a certain lack of enthusiasm for letters among the later Turkish Sultans and their successors, which led to the disappearnce of many literary works of value, including historical works, which, if they were available, would supplement our information in material details.¹ For instance when Sir Denison Ross examined the Arabic history of Haji Dabir, he noticed the fact that Haji Dabir was the first historian to make use of Husain Khan’s Tarikh-i-Bahadur Shahi, although many others had made a false claim to it.² After an examination of those portions of Haji Dabir’s work which relate to our period, I am convinced that the writer makes important additions to our knowledge. In some cases he gives a new interpretation of facts, and in others additional information which was neither wise nor discreet for a contemporary court chronicler to disclose. We should not be surprised if historians like Bada’uni or Khafi Khan had their predecessors during our period, whose independent version of contemporary events will greatly help our knowledge of Indian history. Husain Khan, according to the learned editor of Haji Dabir, wrote his work in the sixteenth century. Now, if our new information from Haji Dabir is entirely based on Husain Khan’s work, even then the latter writer must have based his history, in part at least, on works of an earlier period of which we are at present totally ignorant. I have digressed for a moment to show that our knowledge of the contemporary historical literature is far from complete, and a good prospect awaits a patient collector of chronicles.