1904.] H. Beveridge —Observations on General Maclagan's paper. 51 
Tabaqat-i-Akbari of Nizam-u-d-din, though unfortunately the passage 
has not been translated in Elliot’s History. Curiously enough, Abul 
Fazl does not mention his father Mubarak as one of the authors of the 
declaration. According to Badayuni, it was Mubarak who drafted the 
document and who was the chief instigator of it, and the only one who 
voluntarily signed it. The chapter also tells of Akbar’s mounting the 
pulpit, and gives the verse composed for him by Eaizl, though of course 
it makes no allusion to the break-down described by Badayuni. Ap¬ 
parently this incident took place in the last week of June 1579, and so 
about two months before the signing of the declaration which seems to have 
occurred in the beginning of September of that year. Abul Fazl however 
mentions the latter event first, which shows, if proof were needed, that 
he is not an accurate chronologist. The chapter goes on to notice the 
opposition excited by Akbar’s procedure, and how some accused him of 
claiming to be God, others of bis claiming to be a prophet, while a third set 
maintained that he was a Shia, and a fourth that he had turned a Hindu ! 
There is another chapter in which Abul Fazl describes the discus¬ 
sions in tlie ‘Ibadatkhana or “ House of worship.” This is an earlier 
chapter and belongs to the 23rd year. (Bib. Ind. ed., III. 252.) This 
chapter has been partially translated in Elliot, YI. 59, and is famous 
on account of its mention of Father Rodolfo Acquaviva. 1 Presumably 
the reference to Acquaviva was inserted in a subsequent recension by 
the author, for it is wanting in the Lucknow and Cawnpore editions. 
There can be no doubt that Rodolfo Acquaviva is the person meaut, 
though some MSS. call him Radif and some Raunaq. In an excel¬ 
lent MS. belonging to the India Office, formerly numbered 564, and 
now 236, the name is spelt very carefully Rudulfu, all the points being 
given. It is singular, however, that Abul Fazl should have put his 
mention of Acquaviva into the 23rd year, i.e., between 10th March 1578 
andMarch 1579,for it is certain that Acquaviva did not reach Fathpur SikrI 
till 18th February 1589 2 and presumably he could not have taken part in 
the discussions in the Ibadatkhana till some months later, when he 
might have acquired sufficient fluency in Persian. 3 * * * * 8 
1 This is the spelling of the Father himself at the end of his letter of 27t v 
September 1582 in the Marsden MS. 9854. 
2 Bartoli says, 27th February, and probably 18 is a clerical error for 28. We 
are told by Bartoli that the land journey from Surat to Fathpur took 43 days, and 
aa they left that place on 15th January, this would make the day of their arrival 
27th February. They left Goa on the 17th November 1579 and arrived at Surat 
after twenty days. Apparently they stayed there for some time. Monserrat fell 
Ml on the way and was left at Narwar, so that only Acquaviva and Enriquez arrived 
at Fathpur in February. 
8 Rodolfo was a year in Goa before he started for Fathpur, for he landed in 
