1865.] Proceedings of the Asiatic Society. 115 



But before adverting to this history and its author, I must ask per- 

 mission to say a few words about the other work, regarding which some 

 controversy has taken place and many doubts have been expressed. 



In 1785 Mr. James Anderson translated, in the " Asiatic Miscellany," 

 some extracts from a work which he styled : " The Tuzuk-i- Jehangiri 

 or Memoirs of Jehangir written by himself, &c, &c," and other portions 

 of the same work were published in 1788 by Gladwin in his History 

 of Hindustan. In 1829 Major Price published, in the Oriental Trans- 

 lation Fund's Series, the translation of a MS. which he also entitled 

 " The Memoires of the Emperor Jehangir written by himself." On 

 the publication of this latter work, that learned and accurate Oriental 

 scholar the late Baron de Sacy at once detected and pointed out the 

 difference between the two original texts from which the translations 

 were made, which he rightly conjectured could not be accounted for 

 by assuming the work styled the Tuzuk to be an abridgment of that 

 which Price called the " Memoires." In preparing his Catalogue of 

 the Historical MSS. in Arabic and Persian in the Royal Asiatic 

 Society's Library, the late Mr. Morley, struck with the very singular 

 distinction pointed out by de Sacy, made some investigations into 

 this very interesting subject, and these investigations resulted in his 

 finding an imperfect MS. which agreed so closely with the extracts 

 published by Anderson and Grladwin, as to leave little doubt on his 

 mind that the works were one and the same, and as surmised by de 

 Sacy altogether different from the " Memoires" translated by Major 

 Price. Further search resulted in the discovery #f two complete 

 copies of the MS. in the Library of the India House, which taken in 

 conjunction with his own, satisfied Mr. Morley that there were two 

 texts of the " Memoires," though doubts might still exist as to which 

 of the two was the autobiography of the emperor. The Baron de 

 Sacy without questioning the authenticity of Price's text, was of 

 opinion, from the exaggerated account of property and expenditure, 

 the number of horses, elephants, cost of buildings, &c, and other 

 internal evidence furnished by the book itself, that that text had not 

 so great a right to be considered the work of the emperor himself as 

 the MS. which served both Anderson and Grladwin. And I must say 

 that there is much of reason in the remarks of this illustrious Savant, 

 for on no other grounds than the assumption of a complete revolution 



