Abbas Khān Sarwānī and The Tu Fa-Yi Akbar Shāhī

'Abbas Khān Sarwānī and the Tuḥfa-yi Akbar Shāhī.
A Critical Study
Author(s): Rahim Raza
Source: East and West, Vol. 33, No. 1/4 (December 1983), pp. 143-176
Published by: Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente (IsIAO)
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/29756652
Accessed: 09-03-2020 11:06 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente (IsIAO) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to East and West
This content downloaded from 103.55.109.77 on Mon, 09 Mar 2020 11:06:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
'Abbas Khan Sarwani and the Tuhfa-yi Akbar Shahi.
A Critical Study
by Rahim Raza
1.1. The publication of E.G. Baley's (*) abridged translation of 'Abbas Khan's
work as the 'Ta' rlkh-i Sher Sh?hf in the History of India as Told by Its Own
Historians (2), resulted in a continuous spread of the realization of its import?
ance as an authority for the life and times of Sher Sh?h. Later historians such
as K. Qanungo (3), H. Haig (4), A. Rahim (5) and I. Siddiqi (6), by drawing
upon this work, have greatly contributed to the knowledge of the history of
medieval India. And though, there is still room for improvement, a critical
(*) The following is the scheme of transliteration:

^ == b ' = p O = t = s 5/ - = j & = c Zs =h
&=x >=d 5> = z ^ = r >/=^z 0"=is cJ* ? s
W = s (j> = z J* = t >' = z 6 = ' 6 = g c>: = f
<3 = q = k = g J = 1 f = m (J = n j = v, w
a = h (silent ? as a last letter in a word is not reoresented) / (hamza) = ' (S ? = y.
However kh, sh, ch and gh for ? , > % > and ?/ respectively are retained in the
spelling of names and titles of persons and books. The vowels are represented as a,
?, i, i, u, ?, e and o.
(**) Acknowledgment: I wish to record my gratitude to Dr. A. Mortons of the School
of Oriental and African Studies for his patient reading of my hand-written paper and for
his invaluable suggestions; to Mr. S. Digby well-known scholar of medieval Indian history
who graciously invited me to consult Indo-Persian manuscripts of his own collection. I
am indebted to the library staff of India Office, the S.O.A.S. and the British Museum for
their sympathetic and generous help during my stay in London.
(*) Edward Clive Baley (1821-1884) was a member of the Bengal Civil Service.
(2) H.M. Elliot & J. Dowson, eds., The History of India as told by its oivn Historians,
The Muhammadan Period, vol. IV, Londra, 1872, pp. 301-433.
(3) K. Qanungo, Sher Shah, Calcutta, 1921.
K. Qanungo, Sher Shah and his Times, Calcutta, 1965.
(4) W. Haig, ed., The Cambridge History of India, vol. IV, Cambridge, 1937.
(5) A. Rahim, The History of the Afghans, Karachi, 1961.
(6) LH. Siddiqi, Some Aspects of Afghan Despotism in India, Aligarh, 1969.
I.H. Siddiqi, History of Sher Shah Sur, Aligarh, 1971.
143
edition (7) and two complete English translations (8) of the text have come into
existence. But our knowledge regarding this prime authority on Sher Sh?h has
remained inadequate and scanty. It seems worthwhile to the writer to give a
description of the life and the family of 'Abb?s Khan Sarw?ni before proceeding
to deal with more complex problems like the original contents and title of his
work; his attitude towards history and towards the two rival powers in India,
the Mughals and the Afghans; his sources and his influence on later chroniclers
and the characteristics of his language.
2.1. All that we know about 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni is what he himself ideal
istically records in different parts of his book (9). He belonged to an Afghan
house of pirs or spiritual guides. His ancestral home was in the pargana of
Ban?r (10) in R?h C1). His great grandfather, Shaykh R?j?, had migrated to
India but when Babur conquered it from the Afghans he went back to R?h (12),
as he did not like to live among the Mughals. Shaykh R?j?'s son Shaykh
B?yazid is said to have combined both the temporal and the spiritual powers, by
becoming chief of the Sarw?nls and the successor to the noted pir Shaykh
Ahmad Kakb?r Sarw?ni, grandfather of Shaykh Malhi Qatt?l. Shaykh B?yazid
was known throughout R?h for his holiness and miraculous deeds (13). 'Abb?s
Kh?n claims that most of the Afghans were spiritual disciples (mund) and fol?
lowers (mu'taqid) of his house (X?nd?n), and that the descendants of Shaykh
(7) 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni, Ta}rikh-i Sher Sh?hi, ed., Imam al-Din, Dacca, 1964.
Henceforth TSS.
(8) 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni, Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi, tr. Imam al-Din, Dacca, 1964.
Henceforth TSS, tr.
'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni, Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi, tr. Ambashthya, Patna, 1974.
(9) The description of the life of 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni and of his relatives is entirely
based on the account of the author recorded in pp. 55, 61, 62, 162, 166-167 and 203 of
the TSS.
(10) TSS, p. 167.
Ban?r is situated in north-west of Ambala in modern Indian state of the Punjab.
See The Imperial Gazetteer, vol. VI, Oxford, 1908, pp. 413-4.
(n) The name R?h is used by medieval historians to indicate regions of the concen?
tration and immigration of the Afghans which roughly included parts of modern Indian
Punjab, Pakistani Punjab and Sindh and extended as far as Kabul (Cf. TSS, tr. foot-note
pp. 3-4). R?h is not Pashtu as claimed by Imam al-Din and others, instead it is a Punjabi
and Multani word (Olaf Caroe, The Pathans, London, 1958, p. XVI note 6, p. 4 note 4 and
p. 118). 'Abb?s Kh?n often mentions R?h and Hind in juxtaposition for indicating the
country inhabited by the Afghans distinct from that of the land of the Indians. He also
mentions the appointment of Sher Shah's own nephew Mub?rik Kh?n to the governorship
of R?h (TSS, p. 232; TSS, tr. p. 185). See Joseph E. Schwartzberg, ed., A Historical
Atlas of South Asia, Chicago, 1978, pp. 40 a, 44 aC and 137 b.
(12) TSS, p. 167.
(13) TSS, p. 166.
144
Ahmad Kakb?r were unique in piety and in learning alike. All were conscious
of the nobility and dignity of the house which enjoyed the highest honour
among the Afghans (14).
2.2. Shaykh B?yazid, grandfather of the author, paid a visit to Sher Sh?h at
Kh?sh?b (15). Before this visit, he was not sure whether he would receive the
same respect from Sher Sh?h as Bahlul (1451-1489) and Sikandar Lodi (1489
1517) had accorded to his ancestors (buzurg?n), since Sher Sh?h had changed the
court etiquette for receiving his nobles. His apprehension, however, proved
wrong. Sher Sh?h accorded him the fullest respect, stood up when he came,
went forward a few steps to receive him and asked him in Pashtu to embrace
him. Before taking leave, Sher Sh?h walked a few steps with him to bid him
farewell, and gave him a silk cloth, a lakh of tankas (16) and the pargana of
Ninduna (1T). But Shaykh B?yazid asked for R?h, the country of his ancestors,
to which Sher Sh?h willingly agreed (18).
Shaykh B?yazid paid a second visit to Sher Sh?h during the campaign
against Ujjain and Sarangpur. This time he gave him two thousand bighas of
land in the pargana of Ban?r and the usual gift of one lakh of tankas (19). His
third visit occurred during Sher Sh?h's campaign against Kalinjar. According to
'Abb?s Kh?n, this time Sher Kh?n promised to grant him Multan, Sindh and
the country of the Baluchis after the attainment of victory (20). The promise
seems to have remained unfulfilled as Sher Shah died of burns soon after vic?
tory was achieved.
2.3. Shaykh 'All, father of 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni, succeded Shaykh B?yazid
in R?h. He visited Islam Kh?n who continued to show him the same respect
as his predecessor; R?h and two thousand bighas in Ban?r as well as the tra?
ditional largesse of one lakh tankas remained his. 'Abb?s Kh?n succeded to
the enjoyment of the two thousand bighas of land until the 24th year of
Akbar's reign, when he was ordered to be presented to the Emperor and was
given a rank of 'five hundred'. But Q?zl 'All, a Mughal official, did not, ac
(14) TSS, p. 166.

(15) Kh?sh?b is situated in Shahpur district of Rawalpindi division. See The Imperial
Gazetteer, vol. VI, pp. 297-8.
(16) For Tanka see V.S. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul 1542-1605, New Delhi, 1966,
pp. 99-100, note 3.
(17) Ninduna was situated near Jhelum in the salt range area of the Punjab in Pakistan.
See S.H. Hodivala, Studies in Indo-Muslim History, Lahore, 1979, vol. I, pp. 459-60.
(18) TSS, p. 167.
(19) TSS, pp. 167-68.
n TSS, p. 168.
145
cording to the author, submit a true account and did not speak of the greatness
of his ancestors with the result that 'Abbas Khan's land subsidy {madad-i ma'?s)
was cancelled (21). When Kh?n-i Kh?n?n Niy?zi (22), an amir of Mir Sayyid
Hamid, came to know of this, he advised the author to seek employment. But
'Abbas Kh?n was unwilling to serve an amir, there being no such precedent of
service in his family, and he was thinking of going back to his ancestral home
in R?h. Kh?n-i Kh?n?n Niy?zi in his attempt to dissuade 'Abb?s Kh?n from
returning to R?h, made Mir Sayyid H?mid pay a surprise visit to him to con?
vince him to work for him. As Sayyid H?mid was a descendant of the famous
saint Makhd?m-i Jah?niy?n (23), 'Abb?s Kh?n did not think fit to go against the
wishes of such an eminent man and entered into his service for two hundred
rupees a month (24).
Apart from Shaykh B?yazid, the author refers to Miy?n Hass? or Hasn?,
his grandfather (25), who must be maternal; for while, Shaykh B?yazid's father's
name is Shaykh R?j? (26), Miy?n Hass?'s father is called 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw??
ni (27), whose sons were for a long time in the service of Sher Sh?h. Sher Sh?h
gave the title of Dary? Kh?n to Miy?n Hass?. He was unique among Sher
Sh?h's nobles in R?h in that he married Sher Sh?h's own sister (28). Thus
'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni was related to Sher Sh?h and Islam Kh?n. Sayyid Kh?n
Kakb?r, son-in-law of 'Is? Kh?n Hujj?b, who was one of the trusted nobles of
Sher Sh?h, was the author's maternal uncle (29). Muzaffar Kh?n, who had the
title of Kh?n-i ?'zam, was 'Is? Kh?n's own nephew by blood (bar?dar-i haqiqi);
his daughter was married to 'Abb?s Kh?n (30). Shaykh Muhammad of Ban?r,
a grandson (nabisa) of Shaykh Malhi Qatt?l, was a paternal uncle {(amm) of the
author (31).
2.4. Of his own career in Akbar's time 'Abb?s Kh?n says little beyond that
he was an ahadi and that when he was presented before Akbar the emperor
(21) TSS, p. 169.

(22) Dowson seems to have confused this man with 'Abdu'r Rahim Kh?n-i Kh?n?n.
See HM. Elliot & J. Dowson, op. cit., p. 301.
(23) Mukhd?m~i Jah?niy?n Jah?ngasht was the epithet of the well known fourteenth cen?
tury saint, Sayyid Jal?lu'ddin Bukh?ri Suhravardi. For detail see: Muhammad Ayub Qadiri,
ed., Makhd?m Jah?niy?n Jah?ngasht, Vahidabad - Karachi, 1963.
(24) TSS, p. 169.
(25) TSS, p. 61.
C26) TSS, p. 167.
(21) TSS, p. 61.
C28) TSS, p. 62.
(29) TSS, p. 203.
(m) TSS, p. 162.
(31) TSS, p. 55.
146
ordered that he should be given a pansadi (32) which the context suggests
should be taken to mean an entitlement to a salary of rupees 500 per month (33)
rather than a 'mansab of 500' (34). Thus 'Abb?s Kh?n entered into imperial
service. Considering that the ahadis were not ordinary soldiers in that they
stood under Akbar's immediate orders, 'Abb?s Kh?n held a somewhat special
post. At any rate, he belonged to an elite corps. The ahadis did not hold a
mansab but they enjoyed a unique freedom in that they were under the orders
of the specially appointed amir.
3.1. After setting forth the plan of the third part {tabaqa) 'Abb?s Kh?n tells
us the reason for writing his book. He states that he received an order from
Akbar to 'write down whatever I heard from reliable Afghans who with their
expert knowledge of literature and the science of history were in Sher Sh?h's
special service (xidmat-i xassa) (35) from the beginning to the end of his
kingdom'. He was also ordered to confirm the facts from other people (36).
Why did Akbar sponsor an Afghan history of India? The answer to this
question should be sought in the commissioning by Akbar of the Akbar N?ma.
We must, therefore, examine the command to which 'Abb?s Kh?n refers in the
light of those mentioned both by Gulbadan Begam and B?yazid Biy?t. 'The
command was issued' ? according to Gulbadam Begam ? 'that whatever I
knew of the events of Firdaus Mak?ni (Babur) and of His Majesty ]annat
?shy?nt (Hum?y?n) should be written...
In obedience to the royal command whatever was heard and remained in
memory is being written' (37). B?yazid Biy?t explains that Akbar had ordered
that 'whoever of the attendants of our court gifted with the aptitude for writing
history should write one, and also record whatever they remembered of the ti?
mes of His Majesty Jannat ?shy?nt Hum?y?n B?dsh?h, concluding it with our
illustrious name. And Naw?b Shaykh al-Mashaikh, Shaykh Abu'l Fazl, son of
Shaykh Mub?rik, sent this parv?na to the insignificant B?yazid' (38). Abu'l
Fazl mentions that officers in the provinces were ordered to ensure that old
servants should record events that they remembered. There was no full response
C32) TSS, p. 168.

C33) See V. Smith, op. cit. p. 264.
(34) For Mansabd?ri system see: Abdul Aziz, The Mansabdari System and the Mughal
Army, Lahore, 1945.
(35) TSS, pp. 2-3.
I36) TSS, p. 3.
(37) Gulbadan Begam, Hum?y?n N?ma, ed. and tr. A.S. Beveridge, London, 1902 Persian
text, p. 1 and English Translation, p. 83.
i38) B?yazid Biy?t, Tazkira-i Hum?y?n wa Akbar, ed. M. Hidayat Hosain, Calcutta,
1941, p. 1.
147
to this farm?n, and hence a second farm?n was issued (39). These farm?ns were is?
sued in the 33rd and 34th years of the Il?hi era (40) with the purpose of col?
lecting materials for the Akbar N?ma and 'Abb?s Kh?n's commission to wrke
his book most probably originated in the necessity to have as many sources
as possible for the great official history. Dowson has stated that 'Abb?s Kh?n
wrote his work 'probably soon after 987 A.H./1579 A.D.' (41). But the Ta}
rikh-i Sher Sh?hi mentions the death of Mir Sayyid H?mid Bukh?rl which implies
that the work must have been written after 994 A.H./1586 A.D., the year of
the death of Sayyid H?mid Bukh?ri (42). Gulbadan Begam composed her work
after 995 A.H./1586-87 A.D., and 'Abb?s Kh?n must have done the same at
the same time. Since both her and 'Abb?s Kh?n's works are connected with
the order for the composition of the Akbar N?ma, we may place their writings
not earlier than the 33rd regnal year or 996/1588.
3.2. 'Abb?s Kh?n named his work the Tuhfa-yi Akbar Sh?hi (43). In one
place he describes himself as the author of the Ta'rikh-yi Tuhfa-yi Akbar Sh??
hi (44), in another as the author of the Ahw?l-i Sher Kh?n (45) and yet in
another as the author of the Ahw?l-i Saltanat-i Afgh?ni (46). It is, therefore,
clear that the title which 'Abb?s Kh?n himself gave to this history was Tuhfa-yi
Akbar Sh?hi (47). The Ahw?l-i Sher Kh?n and the Ahw?l-i Saltanat-i Afgh?ni
are not titles of the book: they describe its content. Dowson says 'Its author
bestowed upon it the title Tuhfa-yi Akbar Sh?hi (sic); but Ahmad Y?dg?r, who
wrote the Ta'rikh-i Sal?tin-i Af?ghana (sic) a few years later calls it the Ta'rikh-i
Sher Sh?hi and so it continues to be known (48). The Ta'rikh-i Kh?n Jah?rii
wa Makhzan-i Afgh?ni, composed by Ni'matu'll?h in 1612-13 also calls it the
Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi (49). Thus quite early the original title was changed into
the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi by those who utilised it.
(39) Abu'l Fazl, The Akbar K?ma, tr. H. Beveridge, Calcutta, 1897, vol. I, Fase. 1,
p. 30.
(40) Ibid, p. 33 (note).
(41) H.M. Elliot & J. Dowson, op. cit. p. 301 (note).
n Cf. TSS, tr. p. XII.
(43) TSS, pp. 2, 61, 62, 138, 162, 166, 168, 203, 218.
(44) TSS, p. 110.
(45) TSS, p. 55.
(*) TSS, p. 2.
(47) A manuscript, copied in 1782 and preserved in Mr. Simon Digby's private collec?
tion (n. 114, previous Sir Thomas Phillipps Collection No. 6719), London, bears Tabaq?t-i
Tuhfa-yi Akbar Sh?hl on folio lb and Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hn?ma in the colophon.
(48) H.M. Elliot & J. Dowson, op. cit. p. 301.
(49) Khwaja Nfmatu'll?h, The Ta'rikh-i Khan ]ah?ni} ed. S.M. Imam al-Din, vol. I,
Dacca, 1960, pp. 5, 309.
148
3.3. According to Storey, there are three recensions of the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hv,
the first contains the life of Sher Sh?h; the second is divided into three babs
(a) Sher Khan (b) Islam Khan (c) relatives of Sher Kh?n who claimed sover?
eignty after Islam Kh?n; the thind is an edition revised and enlarged by
Ibrahim Batani, who brought the history down to 1612 (50). There is, ap
parently, a mistake in Storey's description of the second recension, because no
existing manuscript of the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?ht answers that description (51).
3.4. From the collated text of the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?ht it would appear that
the Ta'rikh as we have it, was only part of a fulldress history of the Lodis and
the Surs, the remainder of which is no longer extant. After the exordium,
the opening words are 'the third tabaqa from the Tuhfa-yi Akbar Sh?hV (52),
which means that there were two tabaqas before it. Towards the end of the
book 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?nl says 'after the martyrdom of Sher Kh?n, ?'zam
Hum?y?n asserted his claim to the throne which I shall relate in its proper
place' (53). This is clearly a cross - reference to the intention already expressed
in the heading of the second chapter of the third tabaqa, namely, 'An account
of the kingdom of Islam Kh?n son of Sher Kh?n S?r' (54). S.M. Imam al
Din thinks that 'Abb?s Kh?n either did ndt live to complete his work or that
he discontinued it soon after the death of his patron, Mir Sayyid H?mid Bu
kh?rl, in 1586 (55). Imam al-Din's argument might account for the non-exist?
ence of the last parts of the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?ht, but it does not explain the
absence of the first two tabaqas which in the usual course of authorship would
have been already written before 'Abb?s Kh?n proceeded to work on the third
tabaqa f6).
3.5. The key to the mystery of the missing parts of the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?ht
is to be sought elsewhere than in the arguments advanced by S.M. Imam al
Din. 'Abb?s Kh?n frequently refers to his peculiar source of information to his
unique position of close relationship with his informants and to his privilege
(50) C.A. Storey, Persian Literature, A Bio-Biographical Survey, vol. I, part I, London,
1970, pp. 513-514.
(51) TSS, tr. p. XII.
i52) TSS, p. 2; TSS, tr. p. 1.
(53) TSS, pp. 237-238.
(54) TSS, p. 2; TSS, tr. p. 1.
(55) TSS, tr. p. XII.
(56) The concluding lines of the book (TSS, p. 239; TSS, tr. p. 192) reads, 'Thus ended
the first chapter of the third part from the Tuhfa-yi Akbar Sh?hi the account of the
Afghans'. This clearly means that by this time 'Abb?s Kh?n has completed all the chap?
ters of part one and part two and the first chapter of part three of the book.
149
of receiving traditions inaccessible to others (57). He wrote over forty years
after the death of Sher Sh?h. His most important source Kh?n-i ?'zam Mu
zaffar Kh?n (58) took part in some of the exploits of his hero. Muzaffar Kh?n's
eye-witness account, therefore, had a peculiar value all its own, which utilized
by 'Abb?s Kh?n gave a particular importance to the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi. The
earlier portion relating to the Lodis, however, may have been based on writers
like Rizqu'll?h Musht?qi, who was probably included under 'Abb?s Kh?n's
blanket phrase 'transmitter of annals and narrators of news (59). The debt of
'Abb?s Kh?n to Musht?qi even in the section dealing with Sher Sh?h will
receive further attention later in this paper. It may be that for his account
of the Lodis, further removed as they were from 'Abb?s Kh?n in point of time,
he depended more heavily on Musht?qi and the greater his dependence the less
the independent value of his work. Perhaps 'Abb?s Kh?n's section on the
Lodis offered no new material to that already available in Musht?qi. It may
be that later Persian chroniclers recognized this fact and allowed the earlier part
of 'Abb?s Kh?n's work to smoulder into oblivion. Moreover, Islam Sh?h and
other descendants of Sher Sh?h were in the limelight of history, traditions
concerning them were almost certainly relatively easy to obtain. In contrast,
it must have been particularly difficult to obtain authentic information about
Sher Sh?h ? an obscure Afghan j?gird?r who rose from a nonentity to be the
conqueror of the reigning Mughal Emperor and his dominions. Little would
have been known about Sher Sh?h's early life and herein lies 'Abb?s Kh?n's
most important and original contributions which he based on reports chiefly
received from his own father-in-law (60). It was the section on Sher Sh?h, the?
refore, which was particularly important and thus it continued to be preserved
as the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi rather than the Tuhfa-yi Akbar Sh?hi, the title which
covered the entire work of 'Abb?s Kh?n.
3.6. It is to be noted that even the opening part of the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi
betrays recognizable signs of tampering with the original by some anonymous
editor. The author's preface {dibaca-yi musannif) in Imam al-Din's printed
text based on the India Office Library manuscript (61) is relatively shorter com?
pared with the manuscripts preserved in the British Museum (62), Bodleian (63)
and the Punjab University (64) libraries which record greetings to prophet
n TSS, pp. 55, 61-62, 79-80, 104, 138, 162, 190.

(58) TSS, p. 162.
(59) TSS, p. 2; TSS, tr. p. 1.
n TSS, p. 162.
(61) Ethe 219.
(62) OR. 164.
(63) Elliot Ms, No. 371.
(64) No. SPE 119.
150
Muhammad (65). Imam al-Din records greetings only to the 'leaders of the way
of guidance' (hadiy?n-i r?h-i hid?yat) (66). It seems that part of the original
preface was transferred from the first tabaqa to the head of the third. The
rhymed sentences on page two of the text to judge from 'Abbas Khan's style
in the rest of the book seem to be those of the editors rather than of the
author. The paragraph on the same page beginning with the words farz mid?
rad belongs more properly to the first tabaqa. It seems that the practice of
Persian chroniclers of this period was to set forth the reason for writing their
books immediately after the exordium, which was then followed by an exposi?
tion of the plan of their work. An examination, for example, of the works of
Nizam u'ddin (67), Bad?'?ni (68) and Khwaja Ni'matu'll?h (69) shows an ident?
ical arrangement. Musht?qi also conforms to the general practice. It is reason?
able to suppose that 'Abb?s Kh?n would have followed the literary custom by
indicating first, the reason for writing the book and then explaining its plan.
Thus, the unusual arrangement of the Ta'rikh-i Sher Shahi where the plan of
the work is followed by the reasons of the author for compiling his book may,
therefore, be attributed to tampering by later compilers. The account of Bahl?l
thait follows the description of the author's plan extends to four and a half
pages (70) a very unusual lenght to serve as a background to an account of the
early life of Sher Shah. It seems that 'Abb?s Khan's original account of Bahl?Ps
time was transferred in the existing version to the opening of his account of
Sher Sh?h viz, 'when the rule of the kingdom of Delhi was vouch-safed to
Sult?n Bahl?l of the clan of Sh?h? Khayl belonging to the tribe of Lodi Af?
ghans, there were many people who were striking coins and reading the xutba
in their names' (71). Furthermore, the words dar (ahd-i daulat-i Sult?n
Bahl?l (72) in connection with the migration from Afgbanistam of the grandfa?
ther of Sher Sh?h are not only unnecessary but also out of place. They have
an abrupt ring, as if they have been gratuitously inserted by a later hand, for
the author has already covered the reign of Bahl?l. These words seem to
belong properly where the heading of the second chapter of the third tabaqa
ends (73), and are a proper beginning for the account of Sher Shah.
(65) Cf. TSS, p. 2, variant No. 3.

I66) TSS, p. 1; TSS, tr. p. 1.
(67) Niz?mu'ddin Ahmad, Tabaq?t-i Akbari, voll. I & II, ed. B. De, Calcutta, 1927,
pp. 2-5.
(68) 'Abdul Q?dir Bad?'?nl, Muntakhabu't Taw?rtkh, vol. I, ed. Maulana Ahmad Ali,
Calcutta, 1868, pp. 2-8.
(69) Khwaja Ni'matu'll?h, op. cit. pp. 2-9.
H TSS, pp. 3-8.
(71) TSS, p. 3.
TSS, p. 8.
TSS, p. 2.
151
4.1. 'Abb?s Kh?n wrote his book more than forty years after Sher Sh?h's
deaith. He, therefore, did not write as an eye-witness. He depended on re?
ports received from various Afghans. He tells us that it was Akbar's order itself
which required him to set down in his book what he had heard from trust?
worthy Afghans (74). He checked their reports with 'other people' {mardum-i
digar) (75), as well, but did not put into writing what did not pass the touch?
stone of scrutiny {mihakk-i tahqiq) (76). Sometimes 'Abb?s Kh?n specifically
mentions the persons from whom he received his reports (7T). Sometimes he
uses a general term such as 'Afghan nobles' (?y?n Afg?n?n) (78) and then goes
on to record one or two names by way of example. Sometimes a term 'relati?
ves' [Xes?n u (az1z?n) (79) is mentioned without any names. He also professes
to lease his narration on the information received from the n?qil?n-i ?s?r-u
r?wiy?n-i axb?r (80) (the transmitters of annals and the narrators of news).
This vague term covers writings of previous historians and existing oral tradi?
tion. But he does ndt, in each episode, give the sources for his narrative. Al?
together, 'Abb?s Kh?n mentions seven sources which may be listed as follows:
a) The trustworthy Afghans (Afg?n?n-i mu'tamad) (81).
b) Kh?n-i ?'zam Muzaffar Kh?n, nephew of masnad-i (?li 'Is? Kh?n ibn
tnasnad-i f?li Haybat Kh?n ibn masnad-i '?li 'Umar Kh?n Sarw?ni (82).
c) Shaykh Muhammad ibn Shaykh B?yazld Sarw?ni (83).
d) 'Abdu'l-Mu'min, son-in4aw of Maul?n? Muhammad of Bain?r (84).
e) A companion of Kh?n-i Kh?n?n Y?suf Kbayl (85).
/) Relatives and companions [xes?n u 'aziz?ri) of the author who were
great amirs (86).
g) 'The transmitters of annals and the narrators of news' (n?qil?n-i
as?r u r?wiy?n-i axb?r) (87).
4.2. At first sight, the above list may seem impressive. But it does not ap?
pear that he resorted to all of his listed sources very often. For example (f)
n TSS, pp. 2-3.

(75) TSS, p. 3.
(76) TSS, p. 3.
(77) TSS, pp. 138, 223.
n TSS, p. 110.
(79) TSS, p. 79.
(80) TSS, pp. 218, 232.
(81) TSS, pp. 2-3, 228.
(82) TSS, pp. 110, 138, 190, 223.
(83) TSS, pp. 55, 110, 161, 190.
(84) TSS, p. 161.
(85) TSS, p. 104.
(86) TSS, pp. 79-80.
(87) TSS, pp. 218, 232.
152
seems to be an important source but 'relatives and companions' is a vague ex?
pression, and may include (b), (c) and (d). Again (a) is mentioned twice, once
as a general term, 'trustworthy Afghans' and again as 'a trustworthy person who
accompanied Shaj?'at Kh?n' (88). Furthermore (e) is mentioned only once,
while (g) twice. It seems that 'Abb?s Khan's chief source of information was
(b) for, after emphasizing his relationship with Muzaffar Kh?n, he says 'I have
heard most of the account of the Afghans which I write from Kh?n-i ?'zam
Muzaffar Kh?n (89). We are lucky in having 'Abb?s Kh?n's own statement
regarding the nature of his method of collecting information and their authen?
ticity, and trustworthiness. The origin of this statement is in his concern about
the existence of a 'dolt story' (90) related to Sher Sh?h's capture of the Fort of
Rohtas. He is anxious to establish his credibility and is at pains to convey that
his version should be believed. Thus he sums up in these words:
Miy?n Hass? ihn 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni is one of my grandfathers.

The sons of 'Abb?s Kh?n attended on Sher Kh?n. He (Sher Kh?n)
had given the title of Dary? Kh?n to Miy?n Hass?. There was none
among the amirs of Sher Kh?n like him because he had married Sher
Kh?n's own sister.
He concludes:
The object of this humble one in giving these details is that as be?
tween Sher Kh?n and myself there have been many bonds; I have a
better knowledge of his affairs because I have ascertained them from
my own ancestors (91).
4.3. In writing his history 'Abb?s Kh?n consciously applies the us?l-i isn?d (92)
(principle for documentation), evolved by the scholars of ah?dis (93) (traditions
and sayings related to Prophet Muhammad, His companions, successors, etc.).
Thus on different occasions he presenits his reports in the manner of isn?d.
^ TSS, p. 228.
89) TSS, p. 162.
w) For detail see: TSS, pp. 109-110; TSS, tr. p. 79.
91) TSS, pp. 61-62; TSS, tr. pp. 45-46.
(92) Cf. K.A. Nizami, 'Zi?'u'ddin BaranT, ki Historians of Medieval India, ed. Muhibbul
Hasan, Meerut, 1968, p. 38.
(93) On relation between, hails and history see: P. Hardy, Historians of Meiieval
Iniia, London, 1960, pp. 22-23, 39.
153
For example:
I, 'Abbas, the writer of the adventures of Sher Kh?n, heard it from
the chief of the grand Shaykhs, Shaykh Muhammad, my uncle, the
grandson of the chosen chief of the mystics, Shaykh Malhl Qatt?l (94).
And agaiin:
I the author of the Tuhfa-yi Akbar Sh?hi, 'Abb?s Kh?n, son of Shaykh
'All, have inquired from the chiefs ... from the chief of the great
nobles Muzaffar Kh?n, nephew of Masnad-i (?li 'Is? Kh?n bin Masnad
i 'Alt Haybat Kh?n hin Masnad-i Ali 'Umar Kh?n Sarw?rl... and sev?
eral others who were present on the occasion (95).
But the analogy with hadis is not complete. In order to confirm the val?
idity of a particular Hadis the isn?d technique requires listing of the narrators
by their names in unbroken chronological order. This is not the case with
'Abb?s Kh?n. There are no intervening links between 'Abb?s Kh?n and his
informers; he has direct access to them.
5.1. In writing the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi, 'Abb?s Kh?n required considerable
intellectual and moral suppleness. He, an Afghan, was engaged by a Mughal
employer to write a history of an Afghan hero, the foe of the employer's father
Hum?y?n. The Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi certainly presents an idealized picture of
Sher Shah and the Afghans serving him. The Afghans, 'Abb?s Kh?n shows,
were united under Sher Sh?h as never before. All dissensions and bickering
had disappeared from among them (96). The Afghans were not inferior to the
Mughals in fighting skill (97). When united under one leader, they could drive
the Mughals out of India (98). The Mughals had not conquered the country
by the sword but through the internal dissensions of Afghans themselves (").
In truth, the Afghans were irresistible (10?). They were superior to the Bengalis,
who hardly count for anything at all (101), to the Mughals who were decisively
beaten at Qannauj (102), and to the Rajputs of Bhaiyya P?ranmal, brave and
boastful soldiers, but unable to withstand the onslaught of the Afghans (103).
O TSS, p. 55; TSS, tr. p. 41.

(95) TSS, pp. 110-111; TSS, tr. p. 79.
(*) TSS, p. 128.
C") TSS, pp. 128, 135, 142, 151.
(M) TSS, p. 128.
(") TSS, pp. 68, 135.
O TSS, p. 116.
O TSS, p. 71.
O TSS, pp. 148-156.
O TSS, pp. 186-187.
154
5.2. In 'Abb?s Kh?n's eyes Sher Kh?n was a consummate leader. His auth?
ority carried such force among the Afghans that no one would dare to resist
it (104). He was an efficient administrator who gave personal attention to the
details of administration (105). He was an indefatigable worker whose daily
life was devoted to a strict routine of work (106). He was a great builder of
roads and sar?is {10?), and protected them from tliieves and robbers (108). He
was specially solicitous for the welfare of the peasants, and ensured the safety
of their crops during the march of his army (109). Muqaddams were firmly
controlled, and they efficiently safeguarded the 'limits of their villages' (110).
He was generous and benevolent, and maintained a liberal kitchen (matbax)
His army was large (112) and he built many forts (113). From the day he as?
sumed control of the government, no one had the courage to oppose him, nor
did anyone raise the standard of rebellion against him (114). E>uring the reign
of Sher Kh?n, quarrels, dissensions and disputes, which are imbedded in the
nature of the Afghans had completely disappeared from the countries of Ruh
and Hind (115). Whether in his presence or not the authority of Sher Kh?n
was completely established among the Afghans (116).
5.3. Set against this eulogistic picture of the Afghans and Sher Sh?h, are
'Abb?s Kh?n's criticisms of the Mughal government. Humayun was brave, but
was proud of his youth and the multitude of his retinue, but kept no order
in his army (11T). He records a statement of Sher Sh?h:
I have studied the Mughal mode of warfare ... The Mughals do not
have discipline or endurance (sab?t u qar?r). Mughal emperors from
(104) TSS, p. 138.

<105) TSS, p. 206.
(106) TSS, pp. 205-206.
(107) TSS, p. 216.
O TSS, p. 220.
(109) TSS, p. 223.
(uo) Muqaddatn or village-chief was responsible for maintaining peace in the village,
for safeguarding life and property of the villagers and for protecting them against theft
and murder. If a muqaddatn failed to produce the culprit he himself was held liable for
the crime committed in the 'circumscription of the Vellage' (hadd-t dih) and was duly punished.
Cf. TSS, pp. 220-222.
(m) TSS, pp. 224-225.
(m) TSS, p. 227.
(11S) TSS, pp. 215, 220.
(114) TSS, p. 238.
(115) TSS, p. 239.
(116) TSS, p. 231.
(ni) TSS, pp. 136-137.
155
pride of rank and high lineage do not attend to state affairs them?
selves, but band them over to their agents who are all corrupt and
who are guided in their actions not by the consideration of the wel?
fare of their master but by chat of bribes. Whoever can afford a
bribe, whether or not he is loyal, realizes his aim to his satisfaction.
But whoever is unable to afford a bribe, no matter how great a well
wisher he is and how good a soldier, his business is never settled.
Through the greed of gold, the agents do not discriminate between
friend and foe (118).
In praising Sher Sh?h and criticising the Mughals, the author resorted to
the technique of hints and innuendos which Zi?Vddin Barani expounded in
the Ta'rikh-i Flrozshahl (119). We can see that 'Abb?s Kh?n was careful of the
susceptibilities of the Mughals. He never himself criticized them directly.
The statement that the Mughals are not superior to the Afghans in the art
of warfare, that the Mughals do not possess the power of endurance in the
battlefield and that their king has handed over all the affairs of the govern?
ment to his corrupt and greedy nobles is attributed to Sher Sh?h. Thus by
putting his criticism of the Mughals, their government and their king in the
mouth of Sher Sh?h, a dead man, 'Abb?s Kh?n is on a safe ground. He records
the fact that Sher Kh?n adopted the name of Sher Sh?h and assumed the title
erf Sh?h '?lam (12?). But as a concession to Mughal sentiment, he continues to
mention him as Sher Kh?n (121) rather than Sher Sh?h or Sh?h '?lam. In other
words, he is left to appear an usurper.
5.4. It appears that the book is a sermon addressed botih to the ruling dy?
nasty and to the Afghans. The Afghans were a great people bdt they could
only succeed by avoiding dissension and strife from which they had escaped
during Sher Sh?h lifetime, but which they resumed after his death. Sher Sh?h
needed to be glorified for he symbolized most vividly the Afghans at their best
and the qualities which, given encouragement, could be applied in the service
of the Mughals. The Mughals should count on the support and cooperation
of a fallen people. At the same time, the Afghans should re-equip themselves
with the qualities of unity, discipline and obedience that had distinguished
them so much under Sher Sh?h and thus prove themselves worthy of important
(118) TSS, p. 55-56.

(119) Zi?Vddin Baranl, Ta'rikh-i Firozsh?hi, ed. Saiyyad Ahmad Khan, Calcutta, 1862,
p. 16.
(120) TSS, p. 143.
(m) Cf. H.M. Elliot & Dowson, op. cit. pp. 383, 384, 385, 386 where Sher Khan is
mentioned as Sher Shah which is wrong.
156
positions in the empire. Thus 'Abb?s Kh?n may be regarded as a self-appointed
propagandist in favour of conciliation between the Afghans and the Mughals.
This hypothesis renders intelligible his attitude of partiality towards the Af?
ghans and his indirect criticism of the Mughal government of Akbar which
he veils by referring them to the days of Hum?y?n and Babur.
6.1. 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni recognizes die importance of human volition in the
unfolding of human drama; at the same time he records events which show
his belief in man's fate being preordained by God. For example, he says that
Sher Sh?h's relatives read signs of greatness on his brow when he was yet
a student at Jawnpur (122); that Babur saw signs of rulership in his face (123);
that 'Is? Kh?n Hujj?b asserted in his speech advocating to him to assume
kingship after the battle of Chausa; and that Sher Sh?h showed indications of
kingship in his person (124). He further says:
Since God, the Holy and Almighty, had ordained from all eternity
to give the country of Hind to him, and that the xalq-i Xuda (people
of God) should live the life of peace and comfort under the shadow
of his justice, and that he should be a successful and just ruler, his
dominion (daulat) daily expanded and improved (125).
Again in reverting to the causes of Hum?y?n's defeat in the battle of

Qannauj, 'Abb?s Kh?n says:
His Majesty, Hum?y?n B?dsh ?h himself remained firm like a mountain
in his place on the baittlefieJd and displayed a valour and courage
beyond all human power. As God, the Holy and Great, had intended
from all eternity that His creatures should live contentedly and hap?
pily under the shadow of that king's fortune ...; that after a few years
the Kingdom of Hind should return to him for the sake of his pro?
tection, God stripped the curtain from his world-seeing eyes so that
he himself saw supernatural beings fighting against his soldiers ...
and turning away the faces of their horses. After observing this
phenomenon, he submitted to the divine will and abandoning the
battle to supernatural beings, he turned towards the capital city of
Agra <126).
It should be noted, however, that even in the above instances 'Abb?s Kh?n
O TSS, p. 15.
(123) TSS, pp. 56-57.
O TSS, p. 141.
(125) TSS, p. 79.
(126) TSS, p. 155.
157
sees a rational connexion between events. Thus while saying that Sher Sh?h
was destined, to rule the kingdom of Hind from all eternity, he also states how
Sher Sh?h built up his reputation for being an efficient ruler through his wise
measures. He exerted himself in the development 'and agricultural improve?
ment of whatever country came into his possession, so that within a short time
its condition became better and perfection was achieved. This was because
he personally looked into all affairs and showed no leniency to the oppressor
or the contumacious, even though they were his own relatives, friends or de?
pendents. If anyone entered his service, he would warn him at the very outset:
I will pay you in full the monthly wages and allowances which I
settle with you <and will not lessen them by a single grain or farthing
(ful?s), provided you do not oppress or quarrel with anyone. But
if you do, I will inflict such punishment on you as to be an example
to others <127).
Again, while attributing the defeat of Hum?y?n at Qannauj to the inter?

vention of supernatural beings, 'Abb?s Kh?n in his closing lines notes:
It was tihrough the enmity and strife of his brothers that the distressful
event took place, otherwise it was not in the power of Sher Kh?n
to have resisted that lion (128).
Furthermore, examples may be given where 'Abb?s Kh?n explicitly refers

to rational causes that bring about expected or logical results. Thus the Af?
ghans gathered around him and the kingdom of Hind fell into his hands because
of bis generosity and benevolence (129). Hum?y?n's defeat at Chausa was fore?
shadowed because while personally brave, Hum?y?n was proud of his youth
and the size of his retinue, and he did not keep any order or discipline in
his army. By contrast, Sher Sh?h knew all the tricks and wiles of war and
had seen die days botih of prosperity and adversity (13?).
Sher Sh?h foresees the rout of Mahm?d Lodi's forces because of lack of
unity among the Afghan amirs nominally in his service (131). Sher Sh?h rose
from sitrengbt to 'Strenght beoause he accumulated wealth and made skilful use
of the treasure which he acquired (132). A party of N?h?nls became alienated
from Sher Sh?h because he did not give them a share in the booty acquired
(127) TSS, p. 79.

O TSS, pp. 154-155.
(129) TSS, pp. 224-225.
(130) TSS, pp. 136-137.
<m) TSS, p. 89.
(132) TSS, pp. 63, 100.
158
after the defeat of Qutb Kh?n, general of the King of Bengal (133). Muhammad
Kh?n of Chawnd agreed to help Sulaim?n against Sher Kh?n because there
wias an old enmity b?tween him and Sher Kh?n's father, Miy?n Hasan (134).
The Afghans lost the country to the Mughals through dissensions, strife and
discord (135). 'Abb?s Kh?n rejedts the commonly accepted version of the cap?
ture of Rohtas fort emphasdng his own version on the authority of his fatjher
in-law. The manner, however, in which Sher Kh?n took the fort still remains
treacherous. But tihe explanation is a rational one, and the statemeint of Qa?
nungo (136) that 'Abb?s Kh?n does not mention the other means by which the
fort was taken is unwarranted because he does mention the 'dolt story' in
Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi (137). Thus the dominant note in 'Abb?s Kh?n is that of
a rational explanation of historical happenings.
6.2. 'Abb?s Kh?n is prone to hindsight in the management of his narrative.

His account of the early life of Sher Sh?h is an idealised sketch of the Afghan
hero. 'Abb?s Kh?n does not begin from the beginning, he begins from the end.
He reconstructs Sher Sh?h's early life in accordance with his plan to show how
success was achieved. It seems that 'Abb?s Kh?n had his own set pattern of
golden rules which led to success. Thus Sher Sh?h's unpleasant relations
with his father are turned to his advantage. A recipe for success would include
the following: the morning shows the day so while still young, Sher Kh?n shows
signs of greatness in his face (138). As a child, he insists that his father take
him to his master, Masnad-i '?U 'Umar Kh?n, who being apprised that Fand
wishes to serve him, though very young, grants him a farm (139). When Sher
Kh?n, in his youth, flees to Jawnpur, he has the uncanny foresight to equip
himself for his future role as a great man. He does not frA?ter away his time
in bad company. He assidously employs himself in learning grammar, Persian
literature and history (140) ... When Jam?l Kh?n attempts a reconciliation be?
tween father and son, he demonstrates how his father's concern for a good
education for him would be better served if he stayed at Jawnpur (141).
A future administrator has to have an early training in administration, so
Sher Kh?n prepares himself for his future task as an efficient and just admin
O TSS, p. 61.
O TSS, p. 44.
O TSS, pp. 55, 68, 116, 135.
O K. Qanungo, Sher Shah, p. 148.
O TSS, p. 101; TSS, tr. p. 79.
O TSS, p. 15.
O TSS, p. 10.
(140) TSS, p. 14.
(">) TSS, p. 14.
159
istrator by successfully administering the two parganas entrusted to his care by
his father (142). Sher Kh?n routs the forces of Muhammad of Gbawnd and yet
treats him more leniently in order to pacify an enemy and turn his enmity
into a grateful friendship (143). Sher Sh?h plays his hand well and chooses his
allies with unerring insight. Thus he knows that Sult?n Muhammad of Bihar
would not help him and he decides, therefore, to turn to Sult?n Junayd Barl?s
who had joined Babur (144). This description related to the early life of Sher
Sh?h cannot be true. Qanungo says:
'Abb?s viewed die earlier days of Sher Sh?h in the dazzling light of
his achievements in later life, and passed as genuine history a number
of curious aneoddtes, full of predictions, unconjscious prophecies,
etc. (145).
'Abb?s Kh?n's hindsight shows through equally when he makes Sher Kh?n
express the opinion that it is easy to expel the Mughals from India.
6.3. Despite his desire to present an idealized image of his hero, Sher Sh?h,
'Abb?s Kh?n does not suppress some negative events related to the earlier
part of his life. Sher Kh?n had contacted Sult?n Ibr?him Lodl, through one of
the nobles, to complain against his own father, in order to discredit him as
the administrator of the two parganas assigned to him and thus to have it
transferred to himself (146). 'Abb?s Kh?n also records the negative response of
the Sult?n:
bad mar de'st ki sikayat-i pidar-i xud mikunad (147).

(He is a bad man who complains against his own father).
This clinging to his father's parganas betrays a petty ambition rather than
the vision of a vast empire wrested from the Mughals. Sher Kh?n appears
hesitant and reluctant in his attack at Chausa and his success against Hum?y?n
was due to the factors of surprise and fraud (148). At an earlier stage Sher Kh?n
showed himself content to the governorship of a province. 'Abb?s Kh?n thus
makes Sher Kh?n say to the envoy of Humayun:
mar? gair az daulat-x?hi hec c?ra nist. agar mulk-i Gaur u Bang?la
O TSS, pp. 15-30.

O TSS, pp. 53-54.
(144) TSS, p. 52.
O K. Qanungo, Sher Shah, p. 44.
O TSS, pp. 40-41.
O TSS, tr. p. 30; TSS, p. 42.
O TSS, p. 137.
160
mar? 'in?yat sawad, tam?m mulk-i Bih?r bi-guz?ram, ba-har ki b?ds?h
x?had bi-dihad (149).
(I have no alternative except (to be loyal... If I am bestowed the

kingdom of Gaur and Bangalia, I shall surrender 'the whole kingdom
of Bihar which the king may give to anyone he likes).
6.4. 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni was heavily indebted to Rizqu'll?h Musht?qi but
he does not acknowledge his debt beyond an implied reference to him in the
vague term 'the transmitters of annals and the narrators of news' (15<)). 'Abb?s
Kh?n does not copy Musht?qi verbatim but certainly he often follows him
closely as in the following description of Mall? Kh?n's interview with Sher
Sh?h:
Bar o xabar rasid ki Mall? Kh?n bar dar ?mad. O-r? huz?r talabid
u xiVat d?d u pursid ki d?'ira kuj? karda i. Guft ki da'ira-yi banda
ham'in x?k-i ?st?na ast, bad'?nci hukm b?sad. Farm?d ki hec xaima
u sar?yca hamr?h ast y? na. Guft ki h?l? hama mar?tib u man?sib-i
xud d?r karda mujarrad ba-hazrat ?mada-am ba-har tariq ki sarfar?z
s?zand, hakimand (151).
(News came to Sher Kh?n that Mall? Kh?n had arrived at the door.
He summoned him to his court and granted him a rdbe of honour
and asked 'where have you made your encampment?' He said 'The
tent of this servant is this very dust of the threshold. Whatever be
the order'. Sher Sh?h asked, 'Do you have with you any camp and
tent or you do not have any?' Mall? Kh?n said 'Now I have come
alone to Your Majesty's court, having abandoned all my grades and
distinction. Do honour me in whatever way you like, you are the
ruler').
'Abb?s Kh?n interprets the above dialogue as follows:
Shaj?'at Kh?n ba-istiqb?l-i Mall? Kh?n raft u Sher Kh?n xud bir?n
bi-nisast u b?r-i (?m farm?d. Shaj?'at Kh?n Mall? Kh?n r? hamr?h
?ward. Sher Kh?n pursid ki Mall? Kh?n manzil dar kud?m j? girifta
ast. Mall? Kh?n earz kard ki man jarida dar mul?zamat ?mada am.
Manzil-i man darb?r-i sum?'st u ir?da d?ram ki x?krobi-yi darb?r
num?yam (152).
(149) TSS, p. 113; TSS, tr. p. 81.

(150) TSS, pp. 218, 232.
(151) Rizqu'll?h Musht?qi, Waqi(y?t-i Musht?qt, British Museum (Rieu, cat. of Pers.
mss.) OR. 1229, fol. 102.
(152) TSS, p. 175.
161
(Shaj?'at Kh?n went to receive Mall? Kh?n and Sher Kh?n seated
himself outside and granted a public audience. Shaj?'at Kh?n brought
Mall? Kh?n and Sher Kh?n enquired about the place where Mall?
Kh?n had made his encampment. Mall? Kh?n humbly replied 'I have
come alone in your service, my place is in your court and I have
the intension of serving as a sweeper of the court').
As Niz?mu'ddin Ahmad (153) interprets the information which he obtains

from 'Abb?s Kh?n, so 'Abb?s Kh?n interprets the information which he ga
diers from Musht?ql. In his interpretation he is careful to avoid any state?
ment which might discredit Sher Sh?h. Thus he does not mention the clan?
destine way in which Sher Sh?h took Gaur (154), or how, before he conquered
Bengal, Sher Kh?n had four hundred armed men in attendance and four hun?
dred men engaged in looting (155); or when Hum?y?n marched on Bengal,
Sher Kh?n became a robber chief (Qazz?q) and looted travellers (156). But the
account of the expedition of Raisin is the same with both 'Abb?s Kh?n and
Musht?ql. Both display the same exultation and both bestow praise on Sher
Sh?h for having obtained a fatw? from Amir Sayyid Rafl'u'ddln to justify a
massacre (157) and for having inflicted a barbarous punishment on the survivors
of P?ranmal's family. It is, however, in the conducting section of the Ta'rikh-i
Sher Sh?ht, recounting the administration of Sher Sh?h that 'Abb?s Kh?n's
reliance on Musht?ql is heaviest. The daily routine of Sher Sh?h, his love of
justice, method of revenue collection, solicitude for the welfare of the peasants,
protection of cultivation, compensation for damage to crops, system of branding
horses, recruitment and enlargement of the army, construction of roads and
sar?is, measures for the security of the roads, building of forts and their gar?
risoning, maintenance of an extensive table [mathax) ... all are incorporated
by 'Abb?s Kh?n from Musht?ql (158). The description of 'Abb?s Kh?n is much
longer, but this is not because he gives greater detail of the essentials of Sher
Shah's administration but because he adds two long anecdotes; one on Mu
b?rik Kh?n's death (159) and the other on the attempt of Shaj?'at Kh?n to de?
fraud bis soldiers of their legitimate emoluments (160). It is essential, therefore,
(153) For Niz?mu'ddin Ahmad and the Tabaq?t-i Akbari see: R. Raza, 'Tabaq?t-i Akbarl
di Khw?ja Niz?m al-Din Ahmad. Una f?nte persiana di storia dell'India' in Iranica, eds.
G. Gnoli & A'.V. Rossi, Napoli, 1979.
(154) Rizqu'll?h Musht?qi, op. cit. (Rieu. Cat. of Pers. mss.) Add. 11633, fol. 47b.
(155) Ibid, fol. 47 b.
(156) Ibid, fol. 48 a.
(157) Ibid, fols. 54 a-54 b; TSS, pp. 191-192.
(158) Cf. Ibid, fols. 48 a-49 b; TSS, pp. 204-239.
(159) TSS, pp. 232-238.
(16?) TSS, pp. 228-231.
162
to remember that in any study of Sher Sh?h in later Persian chroniclers,
Musht?qi stands at the head of the genealogical tree of historiographers and
sources. At this stage we must mention the lost Taw?rikh-i Dawlat-i Sher
Sh?hi (161), which was compiled by a close associate of Sher Sh?h in 1548, only
three years after the death of the Afghan monarch. There is a strong possibility
that this boot might have been covered by the phrase 'the transmitters of
annals and the narrators of news' by which 'Abb?s Kh?n mentions his unnamed
sources. But as the book exists only in extracts, we are not in a position to
measure its influence on the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi.
6.5. 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni's work Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi in its turn, was liberally
used by later authors in their sketches of the life and achievements of Sher
Sh?h. Niz?mu'ddin Ahmad's section on Sher Sh?h is little more than an adapted
summary of ithe Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi (162). Niz?mu'ddin Ahmad is careful to
leave out those statements which might hurt Mughal susceptibilities. Thus he
does not mention the expulsion of the Mugjbals from Hindustan by Sher
Sh?h (163). He blames the defeat of Hum?y?n at Qannauj on Sher Sh?h's
trickery (164) and upon the cowardly desertion of the Mughal amirs (165); omits
all reference to supernatural intervention; does not accept 'Abb?s Kh?n's version
of the capture of Robtas fort and makes no reference to the respectful treat?
ment which Sher Sh?h accorded to Hum?y?n's harem after the battle of Chausa.
Although Niz?mu'ddln's dependence on 'Abb?s Kh?n is patent, he does not
mention the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi in the list of his twenty nine sources (166).
Bad?'?ni and Firishta do not mention it either. They both copy their section
on Sher Sh?h from Niz?mu'ddin (167). Ni'matu'll?h, however, explicitly men?
tions the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi twice (168). Whether the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi is
explicitly mentioned or not the debt of the above mentioned authors to 'Abb?s
Kh?n is clear. In fa?t, itfoe Ta'rikh-i D?'?di (169) and the Ta'rikh-i Sh?hi (17?)
which were compiled, like the Ta'rikh-i Kh?n Jah?ni during the reign of Jah?n
(161) For Taw?ftkh-i Daulat-i Sher Sh?ht see: Medieval Indian Quarterly, Aligarh, 1950,
vol. I, No. 1.
(162) Niz?mu'ddin Ahmad, op. cit., ii, 86-107.
(163) Ibid, p. 93.
(164) Ibid, p. 45.
(165) Ibid, p. 102.
(166) Ibid, vol. I, pp. 3-4; R. Raza, op. cit. p. 240.
O Gf. TSS, tr. p. XV.
(168) Khw?ja Ni'matu'll?h, op. cit. pp. 4-5, 309.
(169) 'Abdullah, Ta'rikh-i D?'?di, ed. Shaykh Abdur Rashid, Aligarh, 1954.
(170) Ahmad Y?dg?r, Ta'rikh-i Sh?ht, ed. M. Hidayat Hosain, Calcutta, 1939.
163
glr (1605-1627) contain very little additional information with regard to Sher
Sh?h (171).
6.6. 'Abb?s Kh?n's most original contribution, in addition to his information

on early career of the Afghan hero, lies in the detailed description of the ad?
ministration of a pargana. But as he wrote nearly half a century after the
death of Sher Sh?h, it is possible that he uses terms which were not contem?
porary with Sher Sh?h, and that he is influenced in his description by the
institutions of his own time. Since he was in the Mughal service as an ahadi
he had opportunities to become acquainted with the revenue technicalities of
the Mughal governmerit; it is difficult to say to what extent he mixed up the
old with the new.
Credit goes to 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni for recording beliefs, usages and cus?
toms of the time of Sher Sh?h. Thus describing the influence of 'the step?
mother of Sher Kh?n over his father, Miy?n Hasan, 'Abb?s Kh?n says:
... It has been advised by learned men not to depend on women, not
to inform them of their secrets, not to consult them in state affairs
and not to let them know the account of wealth and store of things
other than the eatables ... The time ^he knows ithat her husband suf?
fers from his love for her, she no longer feels subordinated and
considers him as her servant (172).
When Miy?n Hasan died, one of the step-brothers of Sher Kh?n, Sulay
m?n, put on his head the turban of his deceased father. This made Miy?n
Niz?m, Sher Kh?n's own brother, angry; he took the turban off Sulaym?n's
head and said:
It does not behove you that inspite of there being Farid, the elder
brother ... you put the turban of Miy?n Hasan on your own head.
Be afraid of God; are you not ashamed before the people of God
to act contrary to the law [q?'ida) and custom (dast?r)? (173).
There was an usage of performing ablution or saying one's prayer before

joining the battle. Sher Sh?h (174) and Hum?y?n (175) both conform to this cus?
tom. When Sher Kh?n was crowned king, 'the Afghan youths according to
tfheir custom came in groups from each tribe and danced ... The servants of
(m) Cf. LH. Siddiqi, History of Sher Shah Sur, p. 2.

(172) TSS, pp. 38-39; TSS, tr. p. 28.
(173) TSS, p. 42; TSS, tr. p. 31.
(m) TSS, p. 76.
(175) TSS, pp. 136, 137.
164
Sher Kh?n sprinkled on the heads of the dancing youths saffron, musk mixed
with rose-water and amber of various kind ... It was celebrated in a similar
way in eadh and every place where the news of victory reached' (176).
6.7. The importance of the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi has continued to be recognized
in our time. Munshi Mazhar 'Ali Kh?n Wil?' of Fort William College trans?
lated it into Urdu (177); his version in its torn became the basis for a French
translation by Garcin de Tassy (178). Later writers have made great use of the
Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi. Haig's section on Sher Sh?h in the Cambridge History
of India is little more than a paraphrase of 'Abb?s Kh?n's work (179). He
does not anallise 'Abb?s Kh?n's statements in the light of his motives. He fails
to appreciate that 'Abb?s Kh?n wrote his history with a purpose in mind. Sher
Sh?h, according to him, 'ruled an Afghan Kingdom in which none was for a
single parity and all were for the State' (180). Qanungo goes even further,
and describes Sher Sh?h as 'the first who attempted to build up an Indian
nation by reconciling the followers of rival creeds' (181). 'Of all rulers of
medieval times, Sher Sh?h stands as the ideal of the new India ? the India
of Hindus and Muslims, united in heart and spirit' (182). More recently A.
Rahim holds 'It was by championing the Afghan national cause against the Mu?
ghals that Sher Sh?h became the leader of the Afghans. After Ghausa (1539)
it was in recognition of the quality of his leadership and his great service to
the cause of the Afghans that 'Is? Kh?n Sarw?ni proposed in an assembly of
the Afghan chiefs to make him their king' (183). It is clear that A. Rahim
is following the authority of 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni. He also quotes Sher Kh?n's
response to his noble's proposal from the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi, 'The kingship
is an exalted office and is not devoid of troubles; since the noble minds of
friends have decided to make me king, I agree' (184). Qanungo, who wrote the
O TSS, pp. 143-144; TSS, tr. p. 104.

(177) The translation was completed on 2nd August 1805. (Cf. The colophon of India
Office Library manuscript Ethe 220, B-41. This translation was first published in the form
of articles in Urdu Quarterly Al-Basha'ir. The edited text was published in Pakistan
(Muinul Haq, ed., Ta'rikh-e Sher Sh?hi, Karachi, 1963).
(178) Garcin de Tassy, 'Un Chapitre de l'histoire de PInde Musulmane, ou Chronique
de Sher Shah, Sultan de Delhi', in F.evue de VOrient, de l'Algerie et des Colonies, Paris,
1864. It was reproduced in book form in Paris in 1865.
(179) Wolseley Haig, op. cit. pp. 45-47.
(l?0) Ibid, p. 57.
(181) K. Qanungo, Sher Shah, p. 420
(182) Ibid, p. 426.
(183) A. Rahim, op. cit. p. 50.
Cf. TSS, p. 142; TSS, tr. p. 103.
(184) A. Rahim, op. cit. p. 50. Cf. TSS, p. 143; TSS, tr. p. 103.
165
only full-dress biography of Sher Sh?h, adopted a critical approach towards
'Abbas Khan. But he, too, accepted 'Abbas Khan's authority by his unquestion?
ing acceptance of Sher Khan's speech the N?h?nis (185), of Sher Shah's victories
being regarded as a national triumph (186) and of Sher Shah's method of settling
an army recruit's salary by personally interviewing him <(187), all according to the
Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi. However he became more critical towards 'Abb?s Kh?n
in his second book on Sher Sh?h, where he examined the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?ht
in the light of information received from other contemporary works (188). Iqti
dar Husain Siddiqi derived most of hits knowledge of Sher Sh?h from the
W?qify?t-i Musht?qi and the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi. He has mentioned 'Abb?s
Kh?n Sarw?ni more than sixty times in Some Aspects of Afghan Despotism in
India and more than one hundred and forty (times in History of Sher Shah Sur,
published in 1969 and 1971 respectively.
7.1. The Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi contains most of the characteristics of the less
learned prose of India which to quote the Maliku'sh-shu'ar?' Mohammad Taql
Bdh?r is somewhat dhildish (bacceg?ne) in style (18?).
7.2. 'Abb?s Kh?n like Barani makes frequent use of the technique of con?
versation by which he makes his characters describe an event or an idea. But
sometimes it degenerates into a disconnected colloquialism (190). We may quote
the following as an example:
... ba-jam?l kh?n (arz kard ki agar pidaram baray-i tahsil-i Him mita
labad dar' in sahr (ulam?' bisy?rand, dar inj? ba-tahsil-i Him masg?l
x?ham b?d
(He said to Jamal Kh?n 'If my father sends for me for the acquisition
of knowledge, there are many learned men in this country, I shall
be busy acquiring knowledge here').
And:
Farid ba-miy?n Hasan guft ki kalama-i cand dar x?tir d?ram agar
hukm sawad (arz num?yam. Miy?n Hasan guft bi-g? (192).
(185) K. Qanungo, Sher Shah, p. 89.

O Ibid, p. 204.
(187) Ibid, p. 363.
O K. Qanungo, Sher Shah and his Times, pp. 78, 214, 216.
(189) Mohammad Taqi Bah?r, Sahk Shen?si, III, Tehran, 1337, p. 287.
(19?) Cf. H.M. Elliot & Dowson, ed., op. cit. p. 302.
(191) TSS, p. 14.
(192) TSS, p. 16.
166
(Fand said to Miy?n Hasan 'I wish to say a few wocrds which I
have in my mind'. Miy?n Hasan said 'Say').
And again:
Az pir?n-i derina-s?l mipursidem ki sum? g?be laskar ba'in kasrat
dida ed wa ya sanida ed. Is?n migujtand ki hargiz nadidem u na
sanidem ;(193).
(We a^ked old men 'Have you ever seen or heard of sudh a huge
army?' They replied 'Certainly not, we have never seen or heard
such a thing).
He is often prolix and repetitive; referring to the imminent war with the
ruler of Bengal, 'Abb?s Kh?n makes Sher Kh?n say thus:
Yacfin-i man b?d ki roz-i jang bangaliy?n ba afg?n?n bar?bari nami
taw?nand kard (194).
(It was my bdlief that, on the day of the battle, the Bengalis would
be no match for the Afghans).
On the following page, he again says:

Harb?r ki jang miy?n-i Bangaliy?n u Afg?n?n sud, Afg?n?n dar jang
sabqat nam?dand u Bangaliy?n ba is?n bar?bari nataw?nistand kard (195).
(Bach time there was an engagement between the Bengalis and the
Afghans, the Afghans surpassed them in baittle and the Bengalis could
not stand against them).
Sher Sh?h asks Ch?r?man to request his rajah to lend him the use of the
fort of Rohtas. Ch?r?man goes to his rajah and repeats verbatim what Sher
Kh?n had said (196). The idea that the Afghans are in no way inferior to the
Mughals, that the Afghans lost the country to the Mughals through dissensions
and strife and that Sher Kh?n would soon expel the Mughals from India, are
repeated ad nauseam (197). 'Abb?s Kh?n becomes especially verbose when he is
theorizing and sermonizing; for instance, when Sher Kh?n is made to lecture
to his father on how best to govern a pargana (198) or when Sher Sh?h ex?
plains to his amirs why he would not take action against the r?fizis of the Dec
O TSS, p. 195.
(m) TSS, p. 73.
(195) TSS, p. 74.
O TSS, p. 105.
(197) TSS, pp. 55, 68, 72, 116, 128 and 135.
(198) TSS, pp. 172494.
167
can (199), or when 'Abb?s Kh?n opens his X?tima (20?) on the personal and
administrative practices of Sher Sh?h. Expressions like 'r?y?t-i nusrat ?y?f (201),
'r?y?t-i zafar ?y?f (202), and 'dam?r az rozg?r bar?vardan' (203) are repetitively
used.
7.3. One common feature of 'Abb?s Kh?n's language is lack of order and
planning. Sentences, pAitases and clauses are grouped together in a haphazard
manner. We quote an example:
Sher Kh?n jarida dar koh-i Nadm?n u Kirjh?k ki b?l?-yi sahr-i Kh?
sh?b ast u Bhera dar ?mad. Tam?m koh-r? sair kard ba-niyat -i ?nki
t? mahall-i q?bil dida qaVa r?st kunad ki sarkob-i Gakkhar b?sad u
dar r?h-i K?bul ki fauj-r? dar ?n qaVa guz?sta mur?jarat num?yad. In
qaVa ki Rohtas ast q?bil dida hukm-i qaVa farm?d u Rohtas n?m-i
qaVa nih?d f04).
(Sher Kh?n came alone to the hills of Nadm?n and Kirjh?k which
are above the cities of Kh?sh?b and Bhera and wandered into the hills,
with the intension of seeing (finding) a suitable place to erect (build)
a fort which should dominate over Gakkhar and which should be on
the way to Kabul and that having kept troops in that fort, he might
return. This site (fort in original), was found suitable and he ordered
the construction of a fort which he named Rohtas).
At the same time we come across orderly passages like the following:
Bafd az cand roz dar waqt-i xurdan-i ta(?m Sher Kh?n dar majlis-i
hazrat-i b?dsh?h h?zir sud. Pes-i Sher Kh?n ittif?qan eint pur az ?s-i
m?hica nih?dand. Sher Khan qaw?'id-i xurdan-i m?hica namid?nist.
Sher Kh?n az ?n ?s m?htea-r? ba-k?rd reza reza karda dar q?suq an
d?xta ba-?s?rii xurd (205).
(After some days Sher Kh?n arrived in the presence of His Majesty,
the King, ait lunch time. By chance, he was served a dish full of ?sh-i
m?hicha (a kind of potage of hard meat); he did not know the man?
ner of eating ?sh-i m?hicha, and cut the meat into small pieces by
his knife and ate with ease).
(199) TSS, pp. 194-195.

(200) TSS, pp. 204-206.
(201) TSS, pp. 93, 114, 141.
(202) TSS, pp. 103, 173, 194.
(203) TSS, pp. 106, 127, 138, 142, 144, 183, 190.
(204) TSS, p. 170.
(205) TSS, p. 56.
168
7.5. On a few occasions 'Abb?s Kh?n abandons his simple prose to venture
on to an ornamental style, whidh does not last beyond a few sentences. Thus
we have the following passage from a speech of Sher Sh?h which has been
transformed into a high-flown rhyming prose:
Man hargiz gun?h-i is?n na-x?ham baxsid. Ins?'all?h ta'?l? ba-sum-i
saw?r?n-i k?rz?r u ba-sams?m-i dilir?n-i xanjar-guz?r xirman-i wuj?d-i
kuff?r-i sag-sifat n?-hamw?r dev-sakl u rubah-k?r ki magr?r ba saj?(at-i
xud has fand ba-b?d midiham (206).
(I shall never forgive th?ir (the zamindar's) crime. With the hoof
of the horsenmen of the battlefield and the sharp sword of the cour?
ageous swords-men, God willing, I shall destroy the harvest of the
existence of ithese dog-like, unpolished, devil-faced and fox-matured
infidels who are proud of their bravery).
And again:
C?n Mub?rik Kh?n in suxan istima nam?d ba-sabab-i naxwat u ta
kabbur u gur?r-i huk?mat ?tis-i gazab-i o istil?* y?ft. Abw?b-i niz?'
u xus?mat maft?h s?xt u dar pay-i iz?} u ?z?r-i sanbal?n misit?ft (20T).
(When Mub?rik Kh?n heard this discourse, because of his haughtiness,
arrogance and pride of governorship his fire of wrath got predomi?
nance and aroused his fury and enmity so as to hasten the persecution
and injury to the SanbaJs).
7.6. 'Abb?s Kh?n cites more than sixty verses as his comments on various
events he describes. They enrich his biographical account and at die same time
testify to his understanding of human vicissitudes.
8.1. Gontrary to the general tendency in standard Persian where irrati?nal

plural subjects require verbs in singular form 'Abb?s Kh?n, following the rule
of concord between the subjedt and its verb, uses the plural form throughout
the book. Thus we have:
(a) Har do pargana ruy ba-wir?rii ?warda'and (208).

(Both the parganas took to ruin).
(b) Huqqah? har taraf paridan giriftand (20f>).
(m) TSS, p. 29.

(2OT) TSS, p. 234.
(20e) TSS, p. 41.
fa*) TSS, p. 202.
169
(The shells began to explode in every direction).
This rule of concord between subject and verb is followed throughout the
book.
8.2. On some occasions, he employs y?' (ur = I) of continuity, used in clas?

sical Persian, especially wihere he describes an event in the manner of story?
tellers. Speaking of Sher Shah's habits he says:
... kahili u gaflat-r? hargiz ba-xud rah nad?di (210).
(He never gave way to carelessness and laziness).
Again describing the power of insistence of Humayun in the battlefield

of Qannauj, he whites:
... wa pil az dahsat-i tir u neza-yi is?n qadam az j?y' nataw?nisti bar
d?st <211).
(From the fear of arrows and spears of Hum?y?n an elephant could
not move from its place).
In the same way he uses 'bi' which was prefixed in classical Persian to
verbs to give a sense of completion or finality. For example:
(a) yak roz hamr?h-i Bah?r Kh?n ba sik?r rafta b?d ki ser dar sik?r z?hir
sud. fand ser-r? bi-kust (212).
(One day while he went out hunting with Bah?r Kh?n a lion ap?
peared and Farid killed it).
(b) Bar?dar?n r?y'-i Mir Ahmad-r? bi-pasandidand (213).

(The brothers liked the opinion of Mir Ahmad).
(c) Farid ... Gulist?n u B?st?n u Sikandar N?ma wagaira bi-x?nd (214).
(Farid ... studied Gulislt?n, B?st?n, Sekandar N?ma and others).
8.3. At times 'Abb?s Kh?n uses 'tu' and 'sum?' in the same sentence for
the same person; he makes Miy?n Hasan say to Farid:
(21?) TSS, p. 29.

(211) TSS, p. 137.
(212) TSS, p. 47.
(2U) TSS, p. 82.
(2M) TSS, p. 14.
(215) TSS, p. 35.
(216) TSS, pp. 31-32.
(2") TSS, p. 32.
170
(a) Agar tu tasarruf kardi bisy?r xub ast ki daulat-i sum?'-st, (aib
nist <215).
(If you {tu) have appropriated anything, well and good, as it is your
(sum?) own property).
Again Farid's step-mother uses both tu and sum? when she complains
against Fand and his brothers.
Amm? is?n bar man u farzand?n-i man kam (in?yatand cun?nki az
sum? maxfi riist. Waqte-ki tu ba-w?sita-yi (aziz?n, Farid-r? huk?mat-i
j?ygiri-yi xud mid?di (216) ...
(But they are Untie affectionate towards me and my children, and this
is not a secret from you (sum?). At the time you (tu) were handing
over the charges of Jaglr to Fand, under pressure from your kins?
men ...).
8.4. One of the peculiar uses of 'Abbas Khan is the formation of abstract
nouns from Arabic words on the model of Persian nouns ending in silent h?'i
hauwaz as bandagi from (banda\ Thus we have words like ihtiyajagi (21T) and
'azizagi (218) from ihtiy?j (need) and eaz~iz (dear).
8.5. He makes frequent use of the causative formes of the verbs d?dan (dah?
nidan) (219) and kardan (kun?nidan (220) which hardly exist in classical or Ira?
nian Persian.
There are expressions which reflect a clear influence of Indian languages
or way of saying. For example:
(a) Laskar-i xud-r? ba-aqab-i in bulandi ki minum?yad pan?h s?zem (221).
(Let us build a shelter for our army behind that height which is
visible).
(b) Qar?wul?n-i is?n pestar b?dand. Nazdik-i dihe rasida ci binand ki
dar b?g-i ?n dih saw?r?n minum?yand. Wa ba-yake az m?z?ri(?n-i ?n
dih pursidand ki saw?r?n ci kasand ki minum?yand (222).
(The watchmen were advancing; when they reached a village, they
noticed the presence of horsemen (literally: they saw horsemen vi?
sible) in the garden of that village. They asked one of the cultivators
'who are the horsemen that are seen in the garden?').
(218) TSS, pp. 39, 49, 63, 221.

(219) TSS, p. 11, 19, 23, 37, 46, 105, 106, 220.
(220) TSS, pp. 25, 67, 190, 192.
(221) TSS, p. 76. Cf. TSS, tr. p. 76.
(222) TSS, pp. 118-119. Cf. TSS, tr. p. 84.
171
In all the three eases the expression minum?yad (or minum?yand) has failed
to convey what the author intended to. It seems that 'Abbas Khan has literally
translated the present form of some Indian verbs like dikhn? or dikh?'i den?,
meaning to be seen or to appear.
(c) Dar'in burj-i qaVa nisasta rah mibinam (223).
(Sitting here in the tower I wait for him - literally: I see his way or
road, which corresponds to the Indian expression rasta dekhn? -).
(d) Sher Sh?h farm?d ki ba-waqt-i tul?'-yi ?ft?b dayira-yi V?ranmal-r?
gird kunad (224).
(Sher Sh?h ordered him to besiege the camp of P?ranmal at sunrise).
The verbal expression gird kunad reminds us of the UrduJiindi verb
ghern? meaning to surround (225).
The expressions raftan nadihand (they should not allow him or them to
go), ?madan nadihand (226) (they should not allow them to come), ?madan na
mid?dand (227) (they did not allow him or them to enter) and many other similar
constructions are unfamiliar in regular Persian while they are identical to the
Urdu-Hindi verbal combinations j?ne den? (to let go), ?ne den? (to let come),
kahne den? (to let say), etc.
As one of the characteristics of 'Abb?s Kh?n's prose consists in the Indo
Persianization of local expressions and concepts (228), there are only ten words
of Indian origin in the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi. They are (a) b?jri (229) (a kind
of millet), (b) bashk?l (23?) (the rainy season), (c) bigha (231) (land measure, one
third of an acre), (d) doli (232) (doolie or ddley, a kind of sedan for women),
(e) ghari (233) (a small fraction of time), (f) lak (234) (a hundred thousand), (g)
pargana (235) (a district or division of a province), (h) p?tri (236) (a dancing girl),
(223) TSS, p. 174.

t224) TSS, p. 191.
(225) TSS, p. 27.
(?) TSS, p. 27.
(227) TSS, p. 73.
(228) Even a word like h?n (shell) which generally used in Persian by Indians
replaced by Huqqa in the TSS.
(229) TSS^ p. 198.
(23?) TSS, pp. 124, 198.
(231) TSS, pp. 167, 168.
(232) TSS, pp. 110-111.
(233) TSS, p. 205.
(234) TSS, p. 167 (two times).
(235) TSS, pp. 210, 211, 227.
C236) TSS, p. 201.
172
(i) patw?ri (237) (a village accountant or registrar), and (j) tonka (238) (an indian
coin). Of these (a), (b), (d) and (h) are used in connection with Sher Shah's
military campaigns; (c), (f) and (j) are related to his grant of land and money
while (e), (g) and (i) describe his administrative activities. 'Abbas Khan oc?
casionally adds the Indian suffix ft or fiu to Shaikh (239) and Bibi (240) as if
these titles are not respectful by themselves.
8.6. We give here as examples a short list of Indo-Persian expressions pre?

served in the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hl:
j?nibd?ri (241) partiality

xarci-yi rah >(242) travel expenses
k?gaz-i x?m (243) a rough account book, corresponding to Indian kacci hahi or
kacca kh?t?.
madad-i xarci (244) maintenance money,
d?'ira f45) encampment or tent
taxtg?h (246) capital of a country
wajh-i s?bun (24T) money for petty expenses like soap
r?ydidagi (248) literally seeing the face ('Abbas Khan makes Sher Shah say
'man r?ydidagi namikunam} by which he means that he
remlains impartial in administering justice and will not allow
himself to be influenced by acquaintance, friendship or re?
lationship).
9.1. It is clear from the above discussion that the Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi is
an important linguistic document. Modern writers (249) have criticized 'Abb?s
e37) TSS, p. 21.

(23S) TSS, p. 167 (two times).
(239) Shaykbjiu, TSS, p. 56, valiant 2 gives Sbaykji. Imam al-Din has completely ignored
the suffix in his English translation. See: TSS, tr. p. 42.
(240) Bibijiu TSS, p. 100.
In Imam al-Din's translation the word Bibijiu is substituted by the pronoun 'you'.
See: TSS, tr. p. 72.
(241) TSS, p. 20.
<*?) TSS, p. 139.
(243) TSS, p. 34.
(244) TSS, p. 42.
(245) TSS, p. 189.
(2?) TSS, pp. 124, 219.
(247) TSS, p. 25.
(248) TSS, p. 22.
(249) TSS, tr. p. XIII and B.P. Ambashthya, op. tit. p. 33 (introduction).
173
Khan for ignoring the rules of Persian grammar. This criticism is mainly based
on the assumption that whatever does not correspond with the regular Persian,
in the Ta'rlkh-i Sher Sh?hi, is incorrect and erratic. Thus Imam al-Din and
Ambashthya, in examining the Ta'rlkh-i Sher Sh?hi, did not take into consider?
ation the existence of a local 'ungrammaticar language in India (250), Afghani?
stan (251) and other parts of Asia. As 'Abb?s Khan was not a learned and
versatile writer (252), he could not imitate the style and language of the great
masters of standard Persian. He wrote in a local Indo-Afghan style, selecting
expressions and vocabularies from his own cultural and social environment.
Thus, the Ta'rlkh-i Sher Sh?hl, except for a few ornamental passages (253), is an
important example of local IndoHPersian current in the 16th century. This
Indo-Persian continued to flourish in India before it was gradually succeeded
and partially absorbed by an emerging indigenous language, Urdu.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
A. Original sources:
*Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni, Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi, ed., Imam al-Din, Dacca, 1964.
? The Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi, tr. Imam al-Din, Dacca, 1964.
? Ta'rikh-i Sher Sh?hi, tr. B.P. Ambashthya, Patna, 1974.
'Abdullah, Ta'rikh-i D?'?di, ed., S.A. Rashid, Aligarh, 1954.
'Abdu'l B?qi Nih?vandi, Ma'?sir-i Rahimi, vol. 3, Calcutta, 1931.
'Abdul Haq Muhaddis DihlavT, Akhb?ru'l Akhiy?r (Mujtaba'i Press), Delhi, 1914.
'Abdul Q?dir Bad?'?ni, Muntakhahu't-Taw?rikh, 3 vols., Calcutta, 1864-9.
? Muntakhab al-Taw?rikh (vol. 1 tr. G. Ranking; vol. II tr. W.H. Lowe), Calcutta, 1884-98.
'Afif, Shams Sir?j, Ta'rikh-i Firozsh?hi, Calcutta, 1890.
Ahmad Y?dg?r, Ta'rikh-i Af?ghana or Ta'rikh-i Sh?hi, ed., M. Hidayat Hosain, Calcutta,
1939.
'?rif Qandh?rT, Ta'rikh-i Akhari, ed. Arshi, Rampur, 1962.
Abul Fazl, ?'in-i Akhari, ed., H. Blockmann, 2 vols., Calcutta, 1867-77.
? ?'in-i Akhari (vol. I tr. H. Blockmann; Vols. II-III tr. H.S. Jarret), Cadcutta, 1868-94.
Abu'l Fazl, Akhar N?ma, eds., Maulvi Agha Ahmad & Maulvi Abdu'l Rahim, 3 vols., Cal?
cutta, 1877-87.
? Akhar N?ma, tr. H. Beveridge, 3 vols., Calcutta, 1897-1903.
(250) Simon Digby, 'Dreams and Reminiscences of Dattu Sarwani', in The Indian Econ?
omic and Social History Review, vol. II, No. 1, Aligarh, 1965, p. 60 (remarks on Dattu's
language).
(251) For detailed discussion see: Gianroberto Scarcia, ed., Sifat N?ma-yi Darvis Muham?
mad H?n-i ??zi, Roma, 1965, pp. IX-CV.
(252) Cf. Elliot & Dowson, op. cit. p. 302.
(253) See supra (5.5).
174
Zahiru'ddln Muhammad B?bur, B?bur N?ma {The Memoirs of Babur), tr. A.S. Beveridge,
London, 1921.
'Abdul Q?dir Bad?'?ni, Muntakhabu't-Taw?rikh, 3 vols., Calcutta, 1884-98.
? Muntakhab al-Taw?rikh (vol. I tr. G. Ranking; vol. II tr., W.H. Lowe), Calcutta,
1884-98.
Zi?'u'ddm Barani, Ta'rikh-i Firozsh?hi, ed., Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Calcutta, 1862.
? Ta'rikh-i Firozsh?hi, ed., Shaykh Abdul Rashid, Aligarh, 1957.
B?yazid Biy?t, Tazkira-yi Hum?y?n to a Akbar, ed., M. Hidayat Hosain, Calcutta, 1941.
Farld Bukh?ri, Ta'rikh-i Khaw?nin, ed., Moinul Haq, Karachi, 1966.
Muhammad Q?sim Hindu Sh?h Firishta, Gulshan-i Ibrahimi or Ta'rikh-i Firishta, Lucknow,
' 1867, Bombay, 1871.
? History of the Rise of the Mohamedan Tower in India, tr. John Briggs, 4 vols., Lon?
don, 1829.
Gulbadan Begam, Hum?y?n N?ma, ed. & tr. A.S. Beveridge, London, 1902.
Abdul Mulk 'Is?mi, Fut?h?'s-Sal?tin, ed., A. Mahdi Husain, Agra, 1938.
Rizqullah Musht?qi, Waqi(y?t-i Musht?qi, British Museum, Rieu. Ms. Add. 11633.
Khw?ja Ni'matull?h, Ta'rikh-i Kh?n-i Jah?ni, ed., S.M. Imamuddin, 2 vols., Dacca, 1960-62.
? History of the Afghans, tr. Dorn, London, 1889.
? Makhzan-i Afghani, tr. N.B. Roy, Shantiniketan, 1958.
Niz?mu'ddln Ahmad, Tabaq?t-i Akbari, ed., B. De & M. Hidayat Hosain, 2 vols., Cal?
cutta, 1927-31.
? The Tabaq?t-i Akbari, tr. B. De, ed. Baini Prashad, 3 vols., Calcutta, 1939.
Yahiy? bin Ahmad bin 'Abdullah Sirhindi, Ta'rikh-i Mub?raksh?hi (The Tarikh-i Mubarak
shahi), tr. K.K. Basu, Baroda, 1932.
B. Modern works:
Abdul Aziz, The Mansabdari System and the Mughal Army, Lahore, 1945.
Agha Mahdi Husain, The Rise and Fall of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, London, 1938.
A. Yusuf Ali, The Medieval India, The Social and Economic Condition, London, 1932.
Mohammad Taqi Bah?r, Sabk Shen?si, Tehran, 1337 Solar.
S.K. Banerjee, Humayun Badshah, Oxford University Press, 1930.
H. Elliot & J. Dowson eds., History of India as told by its own Historians, The Moham
madan Period, vol. IV, London, 1872.
W. Erskine, A History of India under the two Sovereigns of the House of Timur, 2 vols.,
London, 1954.
Habibullah, The Foundation of Muslim Rule in India, Lahore, 1945, Allahabad, 1961.
W. Haig, ed., The Cambridge History of India, vol. IV, Cambridge, 1937.
P. Hardy, Historians of the Medieval India, London, 1960.
S.H. Hodivala, Studies in Indo-Muslim History, 2 vols., Bombay, 1939-1957, Pakistani re?
print, Lahore, 1979.
Ibn Hasan, The Central Structure of the Mughal Empire, London, 1936.
Muhibbul Hasan, ed., Historians of Medieval India, Meerut, 1968.
K.A. Nizami, On Historians of Medieval India, Delhi, 1983.
K.A. Nizami, Studies in Medieval Indian History and Culture, Aligarh, 1954.
175
Awadh Bihari Pandey, The First Afghan Empire in India, Calcutta, 1956.
Ishwari Prashad, The Life and Times of Humayun, Calcutta, 1955.
? The History of Medieval India, Allahabad, 1925.
K. Qanungo, Sher Shah (A critical study based on original sources), Calcutta, 1921.
? Sher Shah and his Times, (An old study retold by the author after decades from a
fresh standpoint), Calcutta, 1965.
Ishtiaq Husain Quraishi, The Administration of the Sultanate of Delhi, Lahore, 1944.
M.A. Rahim, History of the Afghans in India, Karachi, 1961.
Nirod Bushan Roy, Sher Shah's Successors, Dacca, 1934.
LH. Siddiqi, Some Aspects of Afghan Despotism in India, Aligarh, 1969.
? History of Sher Shah Sur, Aligarh, 1971.
V.A. Smith, Akhar the Great Moghul, 1542-1605, Delhi, 1966.
C.A. Storey, Persian Literature, A Bio-bibliographical Survey, vol. I, part 1, London, 1970.
176

Abbas Khān Sarwānī and The Tu Fa-Yi Akbar Shāhī

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abbas Khān Sarwānī and The Tu Fa-Yi Akbar Shāhī

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

'Abbas Khān Sarwānī and the Tuḥfa-yi Akbar Shāhī.

(*) The following is the scheme of transliteration:

(14) TSS, p. 166.

(21) TSS, p. 169.

C32) TSS, p. 168.

n TSS, pp. 55, 61-62, 79-80, 104, 138, 162, 190.

(65) Cf. TSS, p. 2, variant No. 3.

n TSS, pp. 2-3.

Miy?n Hass? ihn 'Abb?s Kh?n Sarw?ni is one of my grandfathers.

O TSS, p. 55; TSS, tr. p. 41.

(104) TSS, p. 138.

(118) TSS, p. 55-56.

Again in reverting to the causes of Hum?y?n's defeat in the battle of

Again, while attributing the defeat of Hum?y?n at Qannauj to the inter?

Furthermore, examples may be given where 'Abb?s Kh?n explicitly refers

(127) TSS, p. 79.

6.2. 'Abb?s Kh?n is prone to hindsight in the management of his narrative.

bad mar de'st ki sikayat-i pidar-i xud mikunad (147).

O TSS, pp. 15-30.

(I have no alternative except (to be loyal... If I am bestowed the

(149) TSS, p. 113; TSS, tr. p. 81.

As Niz?mu'ddin Ahmad (153) interprets the information which he obtains

6.6. 'Abb?s Kh?n's most original contribution, in addition to his information

There was an usage of performing ablution or saying one's prayer before

(m) Cf. LH. Siddiqi, History of Sher Shah Sur, p. 2.

O TSS, pp. 143-144; TSS, tr. p. 104.

(185) K. Qanungo, Sher Shah, p. 89.

On the following page, he again says:

(199) TSS, pp. 194-195.

8.1. Gontrary to the general tendency in standard Persian where irrati?nal

(a) Har do pargana ruy ba-wir?rii ?warda'and (208).

(m) TSS, p. 29.

8.2. On some occasions, he employs y?' (ur = I) of continuity, used in clas?

Again describing the power of insistence of Humayun in the battlefield

(b) Bar?dar?n r?y'-i Mir Ahmad-r? bi-pasandidand (213).

(21?) TSS, p. 29.

(218) TSS, pp. 39, 49, 63, 221.

(223) TSS, p. 174.

8.6. We give here as examples a short list of Indo-Persian expressions pre?

j?nibd?ri (241) partiality

e37) TSS, p. 21.

You might also like