1874.] H. Blochmann —Geography and History of Bengal. —No. IT. 2S7 
and inscriptions, as far as they are known at present. The extraordinary 
error into which all Indian historians, whether Native or European, have 
fallen in describing the events of this period is this, that they have confound¬ 
ed Naqiniddm Bughra Khan, Balban’s son, upon whom the emperor con¬ 
ferred the government of Bengal, with Na^iruddin, second son of Firuz I. 
and grandson of Nayiruddin Bughra Khan, and have extended the reign of 
Bughra Khan from 081 to 726 (A. D. 1282 to 1326), whereas in reality 
he disappears from historical records as early as 691 (A. D. 1292). I have, 
therefore, thought it desirable to give a connected account of this period. 
The Balbani' Kings of Bengal. 
(A. D. 1282 to 1331.) 
In the beginning of Balban’s reign (A. D. 1266), the governor of Ben¬ 
gal was Muhammad Tatar Khan.* * * § On his death, which seems to have 
taken place soon after Balban’s accession, Slier Khan was appointed impe¬ 
rial commander of Lak’hnauti. He was succeeded by Amin Khan, whose 
naib was Tughril. f When Balkan rebuilt the town and fort of Labor, 
which during the reign of Mu’izzuddin Bahrain Shall had been destroyed by 
the Mughuls, he got dangerously ill. Tughril heard of it, and thinking that 
Balkan, who was advanced in age, would not survive the attack, made war 
on Amin Khan,£ defeated him, and took him prisoner. Tughril then pro¬ 
claimed himself king of Bengal under the title of Sultan Mugliisuddin 
(A. D. 1279). The course of his revolt,his pursuit by Balkan, and his miserable 
end are known from other sources. Before leaving Bengal, Balbati in 6S1 (A.D. 
1282) appointed his son Naciruddin Bughra Khan governor of Bengal in its 
then circumscribed limits. As the son of the reigning emperor, he was allowed 
all the insignia of royalty ; but it seems as if he had struck no coins. § He is 
represented as an aimiable man of neither talents nor judgment, and fond 
of the pleasures of wine. Of his rule in Bengal nothing is known. He again 
visited Dihli a few months before Balban’s death (686 A.FI., 1287 A. D.) ; 
* According to Firishtali, lie struck coins in his own name at Lak’hnauti. 
f Badaoni I, 129. 
J This differs considerably from Barani ; vide Dowson III, 112. 
i must vindicate the honor of Balban’s army, “ whose legions daily traversed the 
earth, in the east to the confluence of the Granges with the sea ( GangdsdgarJ, and in 
the west to the confluence of the Indus with the ocean” (J. A. S. B., 1874, p. 106). In 
his fights with the Mew tribe ( mewan , pi. of meiv, = mewatij, Dowson (III, 104, note) 
translates ‘ Yaklald hi bandah i Jchdq i Sultan az mewan shahid shud ,’ “ in this campaign 
one hundred thousand of the royal army were slainbut it should be “ Yaklak’hf, the 
private servant of the Sultan, was slain.” Yale-laic hi is a name like Hazar-dfnarl ; and 
Yak-lak’hi was very likely Balban’s s afar chi. The same name occurs again in Dowson, 
III, 218. 
§ Barani says that he did. Dowson III, 129. 
