MIRZA ZU-L-QARNAIN, A CHRISTIAN GRx\NDEE. 177 



14), and that the captives taken away by Aquaviva in 1583 were Mary's slaves 

 (p. 26), but does not give his authorities. He says also that he has seen a document 

 of Shah Alain's declaring that the priests were granted a pension by the influence of 

 the said Mary (p. 6)." [ 



Fanthome's work is of very little value now, and, if his tradition about a Christian 

 wife rests on the document of Shah Alam's reign, it proves nothing. The farmans 

 granted by the Emperors to the Jesuits of the Mogor Mission have just been published 

 by Fr. Felix, O.C., for the Pan jab Historical Society, Vol. I, No. 1, Calcutta, 1916. 

 They mention no Mary of Akbar's time. There exists in the Agra Mission Archives 

 (p. 85, No. 67) a Persian document to the following effect: " A writ on the part of 

 one Maria Piari to the effect that she is living in the house of Padre Sahib, and that 

 nobody is to claim it as hers after her death; dated 3rd Zilhij 1057 Hijri " (a.d. 

 1647). In another document dated nth Rabi-ul-awwal in the 16th year of Shah 

 Alam w r e read: cf Be it known to the Mutsaddies of Mauza Lashkerpore, illaqa 

 Akbarabad [Agra], that the two groves of trees forming the cemetery of Christians, 

 which were granted by Maryam, has been in the possession of Father Wendel. It is 

 hereby ordered that the said groves be allowed to continue in his possession. He is 

 not in any way to be molested." 2 Probably, Maryam and Maria Piari are one and 

 the same, in which case they are of no use in the question of Akbar's Christian wife. 



Akbar's Christian wife, if she existed, may have indeed been called Mary, but she 

 was not Mariam Makani, this being the title of Akbar's mother ; nor do I see how 

 she could be Mariam Zamani, the title belonging apparently to Jahanglr's mother. 

 Perhaps, there is no need, either, to explain the Mariam kl kothl at Fatehpur Sikri 

 by supposing that it was the house of one Mariam, Akbar's Christian wife. The ap- 

 pellation would be explained on the supposition that the kothi contained the Jesuit 

 Chapel with its picture of Our L,ady. However, I doubt whether the house was 

 occupied by the Jesuit Fathers in 1580-83. 



Professor H. Blochmann thought that Juliana was herself one of Akbar's concu- 

 bines, but the Tiizuk-i-J 'ahangirl to which he refers (cf. Ain, translation, I. 618) states 

 merely that a daughter of c Abdu-l-Hayy, an Armenian, was in the service of Akbar's 

 harem, and that Akbar gave her in marriage to Iskandar, the Armenian, by whom 

 she had two sons." 1 



Some of my friends have supposed that John Philip de Bourbon can be identi- 

 fied with Sikandar. They contend with Col. Kincaid that John Philip de Bourbon 

 married Lady Juliana. The present state of our knowledge will not allow it. It is 

 impossible to suppose that the Jesuits, especially a Navarrois like Jerome Xavier, 

 mistook a Navarrois for an Armenian or a Syrian from Aleppo. We do not see, 

 either, how John Philip de Bourbon could be identical with f Abdu-1-Hayy. In this 

 case, Juliana would have been J. P. de Bourbon's daughter married to M. Sikandar. 

 But f Abdu-l-Hayy, too, was an Armenian or, at least, an Asiatic Christian. There are 



J Quoted from J.A.S.B., 1896, p. 53 n. 1. 



* Cf. [Fr. Felix, O.C.] Catholic Calendar and Directory for the Archdiocese of Agra. . . for the year 1907, p. 208 and 

 p. 208 n. 40. It remains to be seen whether the above documents have been properly read. 

 3 Cf. A. ROGERS and H. BEVERIDGE, The Tuzuk-i-J ahangiri , London, 1914, II. 194. 



