1^88.] H. Beveridge —Remarks on the above paper. 75 
In his Memoirs, Jahangir says that he solicited the hand of the 
daughter of Jagat Singh Kachhwaha, son to Raja Man Singh of 
Jaipur, but his suit having been rejected by Rao Bhoj of Bundi, the 
girl’s maternal grandfather, he had a mind to return from Kabul to 
India, to punish the Rao for his insolence, who, however, was dead 
before Jahangir’s return. 
When the Bundi Rajas threw off the allegiance to the Maha- 
ranas of Udaipur and entered into the Imperial service in S. 1625 
(A. D. 1568), they had made a contract with Akbar, not to marry their 
daughters to the Moslem emperors; and like the Udaipur House 
they looked down upon those Rajas who had done so ; and it was for 
this reason that Rao Bhoj objected to his granddaughter being made 
a Begam. 
Summary. 
An attempt has been made in this paper to show that Jagangir’s 
mother was a lady, Hindu by origin, having been the daughter of Raja 
Bhar Mall of Jaipur; that Salimah Sultan was Jahangir’s step-mother, 
and that the Hindu Rajas did not offer their daughters voluntarily to 
the Muhammadan emperors, but they gave their daughters, wheu soli¬ 
cited by the emperors, to contract marriage ties with them. 
Remarks on the above paper.—By H. Beveridge, Esq., C. S. 
I am very glad that the subject has been taken up, and I am much 
obliged to Kaviraj Shyamal Das for pointing out that the Khulasatu-t- 
Tawarikh gives Bihari Mall’s daughter as the mother of Jahangir. The 
question is, if this is a sufficient authority. The Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh 
has not, I believe, ever been printed, but the MS. in the Society’s 
Library is in accordance with the Kaviraj’s statement. Munshi Subhan 
Rai (the name given him by Elliot) wrote at the end of the 17th 
century, in the time of Aurangzib and some seventy years after Jahan¬ 
gir’s death. He is therefore not a contemporary historian, and we do not 
know whence he got the fact about Bihari Mali’s daughter. According to 
Colonel Lees, Subhan Rai is a good writer, but Sir Henry Elliot speaks 
very disparagingly of him. Many, however, may think his statement 
sufficient to determine the point. The other authorities, quoted by the 
Kaviraj, do not, I think, strengthen Subhan Rai’s evidence, as they are 
very modern. Grhulam Husain Khan, the earliest of them, wrote about 
a century ago, and his statement seems to have been merely copied from 
