28 H. G. Raverty — Who were the Pathdn Sultans of Dihli ? [No. 1, 



ghans into his service, may he correct, but it is doubtful, as may be judged 

 from the expeditions against them undertaken by his gallant son Mas'ud, 

 an account of which I have given from Baihaki's Tarikh in my version of 

 the Tabakat-i-Nasiri, in note 7, para. 7, page 321, which see. 



Firishtah, in his History, gives a detailed account of Sabuk-Tigin's 

 descent, which he took from the Tabakat-i-Nasiri verbatim, but this Dow 

 leaves out entirely. 



At page 50 of his translation, Dow has the following with reference to 

 Mahmud : — " In the following year, Mamood led his army towards Ghor. 

 The native prince of that country, Mahommed of the Soor tribe of Afgans, 

 a principality in the mountains famous for giving birth to the Ghorian 

 dynasty." Briggs, in his version of Firishtah, follows Dow closely and, in 

 some cases, verbatim, as I have also shown elsewhere; and, in this place, 

 he perpetrates the same blunder ; and these two translators are, no doubt, 

 wholly responsible for thus leading their readers astray and causing them 

 to blunder likewise, and to disseminate the incorrect statement that the 

 Afghans are Ghuris, who are Taziks or Tajiks, and claimed Arab origin. 

 Briggs's version of the passage given above is thus [Vol. 1, p. 49] — " In 

 the following year Mahmood led an army into Ghoor. The native prince 

 of that country, Mahomed of the Afghan tribe of Soor (the same race which 

 gave birth to the dynasty that eventually succeeded in subverting the fami- 

 ly of Subooktugeen)," etc. 



This statement on the part of Dow and Briggs is evidently the origin 

 of the incorrect assertions of those who have had, and still have, recourse to 

 their versions for materials for Indian history so called; indeed, as a writer 

 in the Bengal Asiatic Journal, a few years since, wrote—" Hitherto for the 

 pre-Mughul Muhammadan History of India we have been dependent on 

 Firishtah. * * * * Elphinstone's History, for instance, is entirely based on 

 that authority." The writer, however, should have said, dependent on the 

 translators of Firishtah ; for even where Firishtah is right, they have made 

 him wrong. Elphinstone certainly quotes Dow and Briggs constantly. 



What says Firishtah though ? He says [p. 46] — " In the year 401 

 H., the Sultan [Mahmud], having led an army into Ghur, the ruler (j*^^) 

 of that country, Muhammad, son of Suri [see translation of Tabakat-i- 

 Nasiri, page 321, and note 7-7], with 10,000 men in array, confronted the 

 Sultan's ranks." There is not one word about the " Afghan tribe of Soor" 

 nor the " Soor tribe of Afgans" ; and it is from this particular passage 

 in these two translations of Firishtah that the error arose of makino- 

 " Patans" of all the rules of Dihli down to Sultan Buhlul of the Ludi 

 tribe, who is the first Patan or Afghan that sat on the throne of Dihli. 



A few lines under the above quotation, Firishtah refers to the Tarikh- 

 i-Yamini, and quotes the author of the Tabakat-i-Nasiri with reference to 



