iL'rt Proceedings of the Asiatic Socirh, [July, 



But, regarding the name of the first edition, I would mention that 

 on the eover of a copy of this MS. among the books found in the city 

 niter the siege and recapture of Delhi in 1858, it is styled the Wdhidt- 

 i-Jahdngiri, This is the name also under which it appears in the 

 authorities for this period given in Sir Henry Elliot's Muhammadan 

 Historians, and very singular to relate, this is the title that Major 

 Price, in the preface to his translation, says he would have affixed to 

 it, had it been permissible to invent a title. 



Other authorities for the history of this period, are the Madsir-i- 

 Jahdngiri of Kamgar Hosaini, who wrote his work three years after 

 the death of Jahangir, with the approval of the emperor Shahjahan, 

 the Haft Fath-i-Kangra^ the Biyddh-i-Jah&ngiri and the Tohfat-i-Shdh- 

 Jahdngiri. The two last mentioned works I take from the list of 

 authorities given by Sir Henry Elliot ; but I have not seen them. 



I regret to say that press of business has prevented me from com- 

 pleting this note in time for this evening, and that like the autobio- 

 graphy of Jahangir, it terminates here abruptly, at the very point 

 unfortunately where it ought to have begun, — that point where I should 

 notice the Iqbdl-ndmeh of Motamad Khan. After what has just been 

 stated of the author, however, it seems hardly necessary for me to 

 enter into any very elaborate defence of the recommendation of the 

 Council, for, where the sole authority for this period of the History 

 of India which has hitherto served the public, is the biography of the 

 Emperor written by himself, it can hardly be questioned that a history 

 by one so intimately connected with this monarch, and in every respect 

 so competent an authority, would be a desirable work to publish, nor 

 should I have thought it necessary to justify my own opinion on the 

 subject, were it not that the President has drawn prominent notice to- 

 some doubts expressed in our Philological Committee, based on an 

 opinion expressed by the late Mr. Morley in his Catalogue before 

 alluded to. These remarks which I will read to the meeting are as 

 follows : — 



' This work is not held in much estimation in the East, principally on 

 account of its style : but besides this, it abounds in errors and omis- 

 sions, and is in every way inferior to the autobiography or memoirs of 

 Jahangir.' 



Mr. Morley has given no authority for this statement, and I ani 



