Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Army of the Indian Moghuls: Its Organization and Administration c27: Chapter XXV

The Army of the Indian Moghuls: Its Organization and Administration c27

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XXV

c27.1

The war organization of the Moghul empire offers something more than a mere antiquarian interest. The more I study the period, the more I am convinced that military inefficiency was the principal, if not the sole, cause of that empire's final collapse. All other defects and weaknesses were as nothing in comparison with this. Its revenue and judicial system was, on the whole, suited to the habits of the people, they looked for nothing different, and so far as those matters were concerned, the empire might have endured for ages. But long before it disappeared, it had lost all military energy at the centre, and was ready to crumble to pieces at the first touch. The rude hand of no Persian or Afghan conqueror, no Nādir, no Aḥmad Abdālī, the genius of no European adventurer, a Dupleix or a Clive, was needed to precipitate it into the abyss. The empire of the Moghuls was already doomed before any of these had appeared on the scene; and had they never been heard of, there can be little doubt that some Mahratta bandit or Sikh free-booter would in due time have seated himself on the throne of Akbar and Shāhjahān. It is a curious problem, then, to consider what causes could have led to the military decrepitude of a monarchy which had been founded and maintained by its military prestige. How came it to pass that what had been gained by the sword was at length to perish by the sword?

c27.2

In the Moghul army there was little loyalty to the sovereign's person, and absolutely no patriotism or devotion to one's country. To a slight extent the zeal and fervour of Mahomedanism was on the side of the ruler. But in a country where the majority were still Hindūs, any excess of this feeling was as much a danger as an advantage. In a faint degree, there was some attachment to the reigning house, which still lived on the reputation of such great rulers and soldiers as Bābar and Akbar. But Aurangzeb had alienated both the Rājput warrior clans and the general Hindu population. The army was thus, in effect, a body of mercenaries, men who served only for what they could get, and ready at any moment, when things went badly, to desert or transfer themselves to a higher bidder. The army was full of Persian, Central Asian, and Afghān soldiers of fortune, whose swords were at the service of any one who chose to pay them.

c27.3

By its original constitution everything turned, in such an army, upon the character of its head. If he were an able and successful soldier, or even one gifted with the power of leading and governing men, all went well, some sort of discipline was maintained, and some unity of purpose was secured. Thus the first necessity was a strong emperor; for no one but the emperor was readily obeyed, and even he could not always secure obedience. But after the death of Aurangzeb in 1707, efficient rulers ceased to be found among the scions of Taimūr's house. A free field was thus opened to the jealousies and rivalries of the nobles. All courts seem more or less hot-beds of petty intrigue; but in eastern countries this evil growth seems to find its most congenial soil. Intrigue seems to accord with the genius of eastern races; and in that respect perhaps no eastern country equals India. My experience of India is that if a man has only two servants, one of them will at once attempt to supplant the other and monopolize his master's confidence.

c27.4

Disastrons consequences followed from these jealousies among the great men and nobles. As one writer aptly says a noble was *hasad-peshah*, “one whose profession was envy”. In military matters we have not to go far in our search for examples of this jealousy and its consequence, base treachery. At Jājau in 1707, Zūlfiqār Khān left A‘zam Shāh to his fate, because he had been made to serve under Bedār Bakht, that prince’s son. Again, in 1712, the same Zūlfiqār Khān stood aloof at Āgrah, in the hope that his rival, Jahāndār Shāh’s foster-brother, might be destroyed, leaving him to reap the benefit of an unshared victory. In this same battle we see treachery at work, the troops of Turānī race having been bought over by the other side. Instances might be multiplied *ad infinitum*.

c27.5

Furthermore, the constitution of the army was radically unsound. Each man was, there can be no doubt, individually brave, even to recklessness. Why then do we find them so ready to retreat from a battle-field, so anxious to make off after the slightest reverse? Simply because they had so much to lose and so very little to gain. A trooper rode his own horse, and if it was killed he was ruined irretrievably. As a European writer of the middle of the 18th century justly enough says: “Their cavalry (which are among them very respectable, and also well paid) though not backward to engage with sabres, are extremely unwilling to bring their horses within the reach of our guns; so that they do not decline so much through fear of their lives, as for their fortunes, which are all laid out in the horse they ride on”, Cambridge, “War”, Introd. viii. In 1791-2 Moor, 204, noticed among the Mahratta cavalry that the same cause produced the same effect. “A reluctance to charge will be frequently observed; which does not proceed from any deficiency in personal courage, but from this cause: a great part of the horses in the Mahratta service are, we have understood, the property of the riders, who receive a certain monthly pay, according to the goodness of the horse, for their own and their beast’s services. If a man has his horse killed or wounded, no equivalent is made him by the Sirkar, but he loses his animal and his allowance; he will therefore, of course, be as careful as possible to preserve both”. See also *Seir*, i, 315, note 250, Orme, “Hist. Frag.”, 418, Fitzclarence, “Journal”, 73, Blacker, “War”, 21.

c27.6

Then in addition to this hindrance to zeal caused by his personal interests, we find that the individual soldier did not look to the sovereign and the State, or consider his interests identical with theirs. He was the soldier of his immediate commander and never looked beyond him. If a great leader was luke-warm in the cause or was bought over, was forced to flee from the field, or was slain in the battle, his men dispersed at once. With the leader’s disappearance, their interest in the fight was at an end, and their first concern was their own and their horse’s safety. To take one instance out of many, Sayyad Ḥusain ‘Alī Khān left Āgrah in Muḥammad Shāh’s train at the head of as large a force as had ever been collected by any Moghul general. A week or two afterwards, he was suddenly assassinated. An hour or two had hardly elapsed, and not a trace of his mighty army was left, his camp had been plundered, and even his tents burnt.

c27.7

The death or disappearance of the general-in-chief always decided the battle. Outside Lāhor, when prince ‘Aẓīm-ush-shān’s elephant ran off and drowned him in the Rāvi, his army dispersed and his treasure was plundered. Again, when Jahāndār Shāh fled from the battle-field at Āgrah, the day was lost, although Zūlfiqār Khān’s division was intact. Of treacherous defection in the field the examples would be endless. The luke-warmness of Indian troops serving with allies was shown many a time in our earlier campaigns; for instance, in Rohilkhand in 1774, where Shujā‘-ud-Daulah allowed us to do all the work, and in the Dakhin in 1792, when the Ḥaidarābād and Mahratta troops proved more of a hindrance than a help to their English allies. In 1803 the Niẓām’s horse were useless, and in the campaign of 1817 the conduct of the irregular horse was contemptible. As an auxiliary force they were hurtful in consuming forage and provisions, for which they made no return (Blacker, 348).

c27.8

Speaking of the Nizām's army, a writer at the end of the 18th century says: "As an army, the composition is no less expensive than defective, and totally unfit for military operations. They encamp at random, without proper pickets in front, flank, or rear, and in consequence of this and other negligence are easily to be surprized — in short, these numerous bodies of robust men and active horse, seem designed for no other purpose than to adorn the march of their chief, who rides in the midst of them, upon one elephant, his standard displayed upon another, attended by chobdārs calling out his titles". No orders were given for a march; word of them was conveyed to each chief by his news-writer, who attended the darbār every evening. Little attention was paid to merit; preferment was obtained through birth and connections, intrigue, cabal, and other means equally destructive to military character (Ouseley's "Oriental Collections", 1795 i, 21—32).

c27.9

Similar comments are to be found in the chapter on war in R. Orme's paper on the government and people of Indostan ("Hist. Frag." 417—420). In short, excepting want of personal courage, every other fault in the list of military vices may be attributed to the degenerate Moghuls: indiscipline, want of cohesion, luxurious habits, inactivity, bad commissariat, and cumbrous equipment. In fact, Mountstuart Elphinstone, in his "History", 579, gives us succintly the conclusion of the whole matter, "They formed a cavalry admirably fitted to prance in a procession, and not ill-adapted to a charge in a pitched battle, but not capable of any long exertion, and still less of any continuance of fatigue and hardship".

c27.10

I. Persian (printed books).
1. *Dastūr-ul-Inshā*, by Yār Muḥammad, (c. 1170 H.), Calcutta, 1270 H. (1853).
2. Firishtah (Muḥammad Qāsim, son of Hindū Shāh), *Gulshan-i-Ibrāhīmī*, 4º., lithographed, Lakhnau 1281 H. (1864).
3. *Bādshāh-nāmah*, by ʿAbd-ul-Ḥamīd, 2 vols. (Bib. Ind.), Calcutta, 1867-8.
4. *Muntakhab-ut-tawārīkh*, by ʿAbd-ul-Qādir, Budāonī, 1004 H. 3 vols. (Bib. Ind.) Calcutta, 1868.
5. *ʿĀlamgīr-nāmah*, by Mḥd. Kāẓim, (Bib. Ind.) Calcutta, 1868.
6. *Maʿāsir-i-ʿĀlamgīrī*, by Mḥd. Sāqī, Mustaʿid Khān, 1122 H. (Bib. Ind.) Calcutta, 1871.
7. *Muntakhab-ul-lubāb* by Khwāfī Khān, 1137 H., 2 vols. (Bib. Ind.) Calcutta, 1874.
8. *Tārīkh-i-Jahān-kushāe Nādirī* by Mīrzā Mahdī Khān (lithographed) Bombay, 1292 H. (1875).
9. *Akbarnāmah* by Abū,l Faẓl, 3 vols., 4to. (Bib. Ind.) Calcutta, 1873—1886. Id. — (lithographed edition) — Lakhnau 1883.
10. *Mirāt-i-Aḥmadī* by ʿAlī Muḥammad Khān, composed 1174 H. (lithographed) Bombay, 1307 H. (1889).
11. *Bābarnamah* or *Tūzuk-i-Bābarī*, lithographed edition, Bombay 1308 H. (1890).
12. *Maʿāsir-ul-Umarā*, by Shāh Nawāz Khān, 3 vols. (Bib. Ind.) Calcutta, 1888—91.
13. *Mujmil-ut-tārīkh baʿd Nādirīyah* by Abul Ḥasan b. Muḥammad Amīn, (composed 1196 H.), edited by Oskar Mann, Leiden, 1891 and 1896.

c27.11

II. Hindi (printed books). *Chhutru Prukash* of Lal Kuvi, edited by Captain W. Price, Calcutta 1829.

c27.12

III. Persian (Manuscripts).
1. Jauhar, *Āftābchī, Tazkirat-ul-wāqiʿāt*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 43, 995 H.
2. Niẓām-ud-dīn, *Tabaqāt-i-Akbar Shāhī*, B.M. Additional Ms. Nº. 6543, 1002 H.

c27.13

3. Dastūr-ul-ʿaml, British Museum No. 1641 (c. 1118 H.).
4. do. B.M. 6598.
5. do. B.M. 6599.
6. do. B.M. 1690.
7. Kāmrāj, Āʿzam-ul-ḥarb, B.M. 1899 (c. 1119 H.).
8. Dānishmand Khān, Bahādur Shāh-nāmah, B.M. Oriental, No. 24 (c. 1120 H.).
9. Bhīm Sen, Nuskhah-i-dilkushā, B.M. Oriental No. 23, 1120 H.
10. History of Jahāndār Shāh, B.M. Oriental No. 3610. c. 1124 H.
11. Muḥammad Munʿim, Jaʿfarābādī, Farrukhnāmah, I. O. L. No. 1876, (1128 H.).
12. Hidāyatullah, Bahārī, Hidāyat-ul-quwāid, Irvine Ms. No. 251, 1128 H.
13. Mīrzā Muḥammad (son of Mutaʿmad Khān), Tazkirah, India Office Library. No. 50, (1131 H.).
14. Kāmrāj, ʿIbratnāmah (Daftar I), I. O. L. No. 1534 (c. 1131 H.).
15. Mḥd Aḥsān, Ijād, Samānawī, Farrukhsīyar-nāmah, B.M. Or. 25 and Irvine Ms. No. 113, both incomplete (c. 1131 H.).
16. Mḥd Qāṣim, Lāhorī, ʿIbratnāmah, I. O. L. No. 194 (c. 1133 H.).
17. Shiū Dās, Shāhnāmah, Manavvar-i-kalām, B.M. Or. 26 (c. 1134 H.).
18. Chhabīlah Rām, Nāgar, letters of, ʿAjāib-ul-āfāq, B.M. Or. No. 1776 (c. 1134 H.).
19. Ghulām Muḥī-ud-dīn Khān, Fatūḥāt-nāmah-i-Samadī, B.M. Or. 1870 (c. 1135 H.).
20. Kāmwar Khān, Tazkirat-us-salātīn-i-Chaghtaiyah, Irvine Ms. No. 70 (c. 1137 H.).
21. Rāe Bihārī Rām, Nāgar, Guldastah-i-bahār, Irvine Ms. No. 176 (1139H ).
22. Mḥd Qāṣim, Aurangābādī, Aḥwāl-ul-khawāqīn, B.M. Addl. 26,244 (c. 1147 H.).
23. Yaḥyā Khān, Tazkirat-ul-mulūk, I. O. L. No. 1149 (1149 H.).
24. Rustam ʿAlī, Tārīkh-i-hindī, B.M. Or. 1628 (1149 H.).
25. Mḥd Shafīʿ, Wārid, Mirāt-i-wāridāt, B.M. No. 6579 (c. 1149 H.).
26. Maʿlūmāt-ul-āfāq, B.M. 1741 (c. 1150 H.).
27. Risālah-i-Mḥd Shāhī, B.M. Or. 180 (c. 1150 H.).
28. Risālah-i-tīr o kamān, B.M. Additional Ms. No. 5629 (c. 1150 H.).
29. Jauhar-i-ṣamṣām, B.M. Or. 1898, and Col. Fuller’s translation, B.M. 30,784 (c. 1152 H.).
30. Anand Rām, Mukhliṣ, Mirāt-ul-iṣṭilāḥ, B.M. Or. 1813 (1157 H.).
31. Ṣāḥib Rāe, Khujistah-kalām, Irvine Ms. No. 18 (1159 H.).
32. Khushḥāl Chand, Nādir-uz-zamānī, B.M. Or. 1844, id. Addl. 24,027 and Berlin Ms. No. 495 (Cat. p. 476) (c. 1161 H.).
33. Anand Rām, Mukhliṣ, Events of 1159—61 H., I. O. L. 1612 (1161 H.).
34. Mīrzā Muḥammad, Tārīkh-i-Muḥammadī, B.M. Or. 1824 and Irvine Ms. No. 143 (c. 1163 H.).
35. Tārīkh-i-Aḥmad Shāhī, B.M. Oriental No. 2005 (c. 1167 H.).

c27.14

36. Maḥmūd-ul-Munshī, *Tārīkh-i-Aḥmad Shāhī*, B.M. Or. Ms. Nº. 196 (c. 1171 H.).
37. Rāe Chatarman, *Chahār Gulshan*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 118 (1173 H.).
38. Shākīr Khān, *Gulshan-i-ṣādiq*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 69 (c. 1174 H.).
39. ʿAlī Muḥammad Khān, *Mirāt-i-Aḥmadī*, B.M. Addl. 6580 (1174 H.).
40. *Tārīkh-i-ʿĀlamgīr Sānī*, B.M. Or. 1749 (c. 1174 H.).
41. Muḥammad ʿAlī, Burhānpurī, *Mirāt-uṣ-ṣaffā*, B.M. Addl. Mss. Nos. 6539, 6540 (1179 H.).
42. Dalpat Sing, *Malāḥat-i-maqāl*, B.M. Or. Ms. Nº. 1828 (c. 1181 H.).
43. Sayyad Muḥammad, Bilgrāmī, *Tabṣirat-un-nāzirīn*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 34 (1182 H.).
44. ʿAbd-ul-laṭīf, *Aḥmad-nāmah*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 100 (1184 H.).
45. Ashob, *Shahādat-i-Farrukhsīyar wa julūs-i-Muḥammad Shāh* by Mīrzā Muḥammad Bakhsh, Ashob, B.M. Or. 1832 (1196 H.).
46. Ghulām Ḥasan, Bilgrāmī, (Samīn), *Tazkirah*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 113 (1197 H.).
47. Ghulām Ḥasan, Bilgrāmī (Samīn), *Sharāif-i-ʿusmānī*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 27 (c. 1200 H.).
48. Ghulām ʿAlī Khān, *Muqaddamah-i-Shāh ʿĀlam-nāmah*, B.M. Addl. 24,028 (c. 1204 H.).
49. Khair-ud-dīn Mḥd, *ʿIbratnāmah*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 15 (3 vols.) (c. 1204 H.).
50. *Waqāʿ-i-diyār-i-maghrib*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 189 (1213 H.) (almost identical with *Tārīkh-i-Ḥusain Shāhī* by Imām uddīn, Chīstī, Rieu, 904).
51. Imām-ud-dīn Chīstī, *Ḥusain Shāhī*, B M. Or. Nº. 1662 (1213 H.).
52. Mḥd ʿUmr, *Siwāniḥ-i-khiẓrī*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 80 (c. 1213—14 H.).
53. Mḥd ʿAlī Khān, *Tārīkh-i-muẓaffarī*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 25 (c. 1215—16 H.).
54. Rustam ʿAlī, Bijnorī, *Rohelon kī tārīkh*, B.M. Addl. Ms. Nº. 26,284 (1803 A.D. Urdū).
55. Muḥabbat Khān, son of Faīẓ ʿAṭā Khān, Dāūdzai, *Akhbār-i-muḥabbat*, Irvine Ms. Nº. 21 (1220 H.).
56. Collection of Portraits, B.M. Oriental Nº. 375 (c. 1835 A.D.).

IV. Books and Mss. in European Languages

c27.s1.1

1. N. Manucci, *Storia do Mogor*, Königliche Bibliothek, Berlin, Ms. Phillipps 1945 (1700).
2. Robert Orme, Ms. Collections now in the India Office (1760—1805).
3. F. Catrou (and N. Manucci). *Histoire Générale de l'Empire du Mogol*, one vol. 4to. Paris, 1705, and 4 vols. 12º. or one volume 4to. Paris, 1715.
4. F. Valentijn, *Beschrijving van Oud en Nieuw Oost Indien*, Vol. IV, fol. Dordrecht, 1726.
5. Gemelli Careri, *Voyage autour du Monde*, 6 vols. 12mo. Paris, 1726.
6. James Fraser, *History of Nadir Shah*, 2nd ed. 1742.
7. R. O. Cambridge, *Account of the War in India*, 1750—60, 4to. 1761.

c27.s1.2

8. Jonas Hanway, Revolutions of Persia, 3rd. ed., 1762.
9. De la Flotte, Essais Historiques sur l'Inde, 2 vols. 12mo. Paris, 1769.
10. P. M. Anquetil Duperron, Zend Avesta, 3 vols. 4to., Paris, 1771.
11. Minutes of Select. Com. House of Commons of 1772. 8vo. (T. Evans). London, 1772.
12. J. Z. Holwell, India Tracts, 3rd. ed. 1774.
13. C. Carraccioli, Life of Robert Lord Clive, 4 vols. 1775?
14. Davy and White, Institutes of Timour, 4to. Oxford, 1783.
15. Asiatic Miscellany, 2 vols. 4to. Calcutta, 1785-6.
16. J. Bernouilli, Description de l'Inde, 3 vols. 4to. Berlin, 1788.
17. Seir Mutaqherin (1195 H.), trans. by Notamanus (Haji Mustapha), 3 vols., 4to. Calcutta, 1789.
18. Asiatic Miscellany, 3 vols., 8vo. Cal. 1788. New Ditto, 4to., Cal. 1789.
19. J. Rennell, Memoir of a Map of Hindoostan. 3rd. ed. 4to. 1793.
20. E. Moor, Narrative of Capt. Little's Detachment, 4to. 1794.
21. Jonathan Scott, History of Dekkan, 2 vols., 4to. Shrewsbury, 1794.
22. A. Dalrymple, Oriental Repertory, 2 vols. 4to. 1794-5.
23. W. H. Tone, A letter on the Maratta people (1796), Bombay, 1798.
24. Oriental Miscellany, Calcutta, 1798.
25. W. Francklin, History of the reign of Shah Aulum, 4to. 1798.
26. Sir W. Ouseley, Oriental Collections, 3 vols. 4to. 1797—1800.
27. R. Orme, Historical Fragments of the Mogul Empire, 4to. 1805.
28. W. Francklin, Military Memoir of Mr. George Thomas, 8vo. 1805.
29. Lewis F. Smith, Rise and Progress of the Regular Corps, 4to. Calcutta 1805.
30. Thomas Williamson, Oriental Field Sports, folio, 1807.
31. Lieut.-Col. Mark Wilks, Historical Sketches of the South of India, 3 vols. 4to. 1810—1817.
32. W. Thorn, Memoir of the War in India, 1803-6, 4to. 1818.
33. Lieut.-Col. Fitzclarence, Journal of a Route across India, 1817-8. 4to. 1819.
34. Lieut.-Col. V. Blacker, Memoir of Operations in India 1817—19. 4to. 1821.
35. Major D. Price, Chronological Retrospect of Mohammedan History, 4 vols. 4to. 1811—1821.
36. L. Langlès, Monuments Anciens et Modernes de l'Hindoustan, 2 vols., folio, Paris 1821.
37. J. B. J. Gentil, Mémoires sur l'Indoustan. 8vo. Paris, 1822.
38. E. Lake, Sieges of the Madras Army, 1825.
39. J. Leyden and W. Erskine, Memoirs of Baber (translated), 4to., 1826.
40. J. Ranking, Historical Researches on the Wars and Sports of the Mongols and Romans, 4to. 1826.
41. W. R. Pogson, History of the Boondelas, 4to. Calcutta, 1828.
42. J. Prinsep, Useful Tables, Part. I, Calcutta 1834.
43. Despatches of the Marquess Wellesley, K. G., ed. M. Martin, 5 vols., 1836.
44. E. Quatremère (translator), Histoire des Mongols de la Perse, by Rashīd-ud-dīn, folio, Paris 1836.
45. H. Wilkinson, Engines of War, 1841.

c27.s1.3

46. Chevalier P. Armandi, Histoire militaire des elephants, Paris, 1843.
47. G. A. Hansard, Book of Archery, 1845.
48. Captain St. J. D. Showers, Inscription on a gun at Moorshedabad, Journal A. S. Bengal, XVI, Calcutta, 1847.
49. J. Shakespear, Hindustani English Dictionary, 4th. ed. 4to. 1849.
50. J. B. Fraser, Military Memoirs of Lieut.-Col. James Skinner, C. B., 2 vols. 1851.
51. A. Röckstuhl and F. Gille, Musée de Tzarkoe (folio), St. Petersbourg 1835—1853.
52. Colonel F. Colombari, Les Zamboureks, Paris, 1853.
53. W. Erskine, History of India under Baber and Humayun, 2 vols. 1854.
54. M. Elphinstone, History of India, 4th ed., 1857.
55. G. C. Mundy, Pen and Pencil Sketches in India, 3rd ed., 1858.
56. H. M. Elliot, Supplemental Glossary, Roorkee, 1860.
57. W. H. Russell, My Diary in India, 2 vols. 1860.
58. R. Orme, History of the Military Transactions in Indostan (reprint), 3 vols. Madras, 1861.
59. E. Thornton, Gazetteer of India, 1862.
60. G. A. Herklots, M. D. Qanoone-Islam, 2nd ed. Madras, 1863.
61. E. W. Lane, Arabic-English Lexicon, 1867.
62. Colonel T. Seaton, From Cadet to Colonel, 2 vols. 1866.
63. P. Meadows Taylor and James Fergusson, Architecture of Beejapore, 1866.
64. Viscountess Combermere and W. W. Knollys, Memoirs of F. M. Viscount Combermere, 2 vols. 1866.
65. A. Pavet de Courteille, Dictionnaire Turc Oriental, Paris, 1870.
66. id. , Mémoires de Baber, 2 vols. Paris, 1871.
67. H. Blochmann, Āīn-i-Akbarī, 1 vol. (translation), Calcutta, 1873.
68. Voyle and Stevenson, Military Dictionary, 3rd. ed. 1876.
69. H. M. Elliot, History of India, Muhammedan Period, 8 vols. 1867—1877.
70. W. Irvine, Bangash Nawabs of Farrukhābād, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vols. XLVII and XLVIII, 1878, 1879.
71. R. B. Shaw, Sketch of the Turkī Language, Journal A. S. Bengal, 1878.
72. M. J. Walhouse in “Indian Antiquary”, Vol. VII, 1878.
73. Honorable W. Egerton, Illustrated Handbook of Indian Arms, 1880.
74. Graf F. A. von Noer, Kaiser Akbar, Leiden, 1880.
75. id. , L’empereur Akbar, trans. Alf. Maury, 2 vols., Leide, 1883.
76. Col. T. H. Hendley, Memorials of the Jeypore Exhibition, 4 vols. London 1883.
77. H. G. Raverty, Notes on Afghanistan, 4 parts, folio, 1881-3.
78. S. W. Fallon, New Eng. Hindustani Dictionary, Benares, 1883.
79. W. H. Lowe (translator), Muntakhab-ut-tawārīkh, Vol. II, of ‘Abd-ul-Qādir (Bib. Ind.) Calcutta, 1884.
80. John T. Platts, A Dictionary of Urdū, 1884.
81. H. Yule and A. C. Burnell, Hobson-Jobson, a Glossary, 1886.

c27.s1.4

82. David Mac Ritchie, Account of the Gypsies, 1886.
83. Sir E. C. Bayley, The Local Muhammedan Dynasties, Gujarat, 1886.
84. J. B. Tavernier, Travels in India, trans. by V. Ball, 2 vols. 1889.
85. W. H. Lowe (translator), Tuzuk-i-Jahāngīrī, Fasc. 1 (Bib. Ind.) Calcutta, 1889.
86. W. Hoey, M. A., D. Lit., Tārīkh-i-Farah Bakhsh (1233 H.), trans., 2 vols. Allahabad, 1888-9.
87. F. Bernier, Travels in the Mogul Empire 1665-8, ed. A. Constable, 1891.
88. Syad Mḥd Latif, History of Lahor, Lahor, 1892.
89. F. Steingass, Persian-Eng. Dictionary, 1892.
90. T. D. Broughton, Letters written in a Mahratta Camp, 1809, new edition, 1892.
91. Herbert Compton, European Military Adventurers in India, 1892.
92. G. B. Malleson, History of the French in India, 1893.
93. Manual of the Administration of the Madras Presidency, Vol. III, fol. Madras, 1893.
94. W. Forbes Mitchell, Reminiscences of the Great Mutiny, 1893.
95. E. G. Browne, M. A., A year among the Persians, 1893.
96. I. Burton, Life of Captain Sir R. F. Burton, 2 vols. 1893.
97. J. W. Mac Crindle, Invasion of India by Alexander, 1893.
98. August Demmin, Die Kriegswaffen, 4th ed. Leipzig, 1893.
99. Paul Horn, Das Heer und Kriegswesen der gross Moghuls, Leiden, 1894.
100. Emile Berbé, Le Nabab René Madec, Paris, 1894.
101. Sir Hope Grant, Life and Correspondence, ed. H. Knollys, 2 vols. 1894.
102. Parliamentary Paper, Nº. 538, March 1894.
103. N. Elias and E. D. Ross, Tārīkh-i-Rashīdī of Mīrzā Ḥaidar Dughlāt, 1895.
104. John Martineau, Life and Correspondence of the Right Honorable Sir Bartle Frere, 2 vols. 8vo. 1895.
105. Dr. S. Weissenberg in "Mittheilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien", Vol. XXV, Vienna, 1895.
106. Col. R. C. Temple, Calcutta Review, October 1896.
107. T. P. Hughes, Dictionary of Islam, 1896.
108. W. Irvine, Nādir Shāh and Muḥammad Shāh, by Tilok Das, Journal A. S. Bengal, LXVI, Calcutta 1897.
109. George S. A. Ranking (translator), Muntakhabu-t-tawārīkh by ʿAbd-ul-Qādir Badāoni, Vol. I (Bibl. Indica), Calcutta 1898.
110. R. S. Whiteway, The Rise of Portuguese Power in India, 1899.
111. E. G. Browne, The Chahār Maqālah of ʿArudī, composed about 1161 A.D., Journal R. Asiatic Society, 1899.
112. C. R. Wilson, Early Annals of the English in Bengal, Vol. I and II (part 1), Calcutta 1895, 1900.
113. E. Blochet, Inventaire des miniatures des manuscrits orientaux, Paris 1900.
114. W. Irvine, Jangnāmah of Farrukhsīyar by Shridhar Murlīdhar, Journal A. S. Bengal, LXIX, Calcutta 1900.

Linked texts (3)