24 [No. 1, 



Who were the " Tatan" or " Pathan" Sultans of DiMi ? — By 

 Major H. Gr. Ravebty, Bombay Army (Retired). 



There is a very important period in the history of India requiring par- 

 ticular attention, and some strong remarks, in order to correct an error, 

 which, since I have been engaged upon the translation of the Tabakat-i- 

 Nasiri, has thrust itself upon my attention with greater force than ever. 



It is an error which, for more than a century, has been handed down 

 from one writer on Indian history to another, and re-echoed by others, their 

 followers, upon all occasions. It has also misled many conscientious authors 

 from their having placed reliance on the correctness of the translation of 

 the commonest and most generally known history of India, in the Persian 

 language, that is to be met with in India, and one which is tolerably well 

 known to the generality of those educated Musalmans who are acquainted 

 with that language, and, to the translation of which nearly every English 

 writer on Indian history has resorted down to this present day : and the 

 error I refer to is still being industriously taught in our schools and col- 

 leges, both in England and in India. 



I refer to the history of India, entitled Gtjlshan-i-Ibea'hi'^ii', by 

 Muhammad Kasim Firishtah, and the translation I now more particularly 

 glance at — I shall have to notice another, subsequently — is that by Dow, 

 which I have noticed, and animadverted on, on a different subject, as well 

 as on the present one, in my notes of the translation to the Tabakat-i- 

 Nasiri. The error to which I have alluded is the styling of Kutb-ud- 

 din of the Powerless Finger, the founder of — or rather the first of — and all 

 the succeeding rulers of the kingdom of Dikli, down even to the restoration 

 of the Mughul emperor Humayun, by the name of the " PatajST," " Pa- 

 tha'n," or "Afghan," dynasty. 



This error, in the first instance, originated, I conceive, entirely from 

 Dow, who, in 1768, published, what he styled, a translation of Firishtah's 

 History, " the diction" of which he says, in his second edition, " in general, 

 is rendered more connected, clear, elegant, and smooth." That translator 

 also professes to have " clipped the wings of Firishtah's turgid expressions, 

 and rendered his metaphors into common language," and further states that 

 he " has given as few as possible of the faults of the author ; but he has 

 been cautious enough, not wittingly at least, to substitute any of his own 

 in their place." 



Notwithstanding these assertions, it was translated in such a manner 

 as to make Gibbon suspect " that, through some odd fatality, the style of 

 Firishtah had been improved by that of Ossian." Instead of clipping the 

 wings of Firishtah, as Dow asserts, he is far more diffuse, and uses far more 



