नीचे लिखे गए उद्धतरण 'Tabakat-I-Nasiri' के अंग्रेजी अनुवाद से अक्षरशः दिए गए है। भारत और एशिया में मुसलमानों के राजवंशों पर इस पुस्तक में अच्छी-खासी जानकारी प्रमाणिक रूप से उपलब्ध है। जिसमें 'मेघों' के तिब्बत और लखनवति के मध्य कुछ राज्यों का उल्लेख भी है, जो बख्त्यार के आक्रमण तक सत्ता संपन्न थे। बख्त्यार से हारने के बाद उनके अधीन हो गए। जैसा कि इतिहास में होता आया है।
यह वर्णन 10वीं शताब्दी के आस-पास के उनके इतिहास पर महत्वपूर्ण प्रकाश डालता है। इस समयावधि में तिब्बत और लखनवति के मध्य पहाड़ों पर तीन प्रजातियाँ निवास करती थी,उनमें एक कुंच या कुच या कोंच जाति, दूसरी मेग जाति और तीसरी थारू या तिहारू जाति का यतस्ततः उल्लेख किया गया है। उस समय यह क्षेत्र तुर्क के संपर्क में या समर्थन में रहा। इनकी अपनी विशिष्ट भाषा और संस्कृति का भी उल्लेख है, जो हिन्द और तुर्क के मध्य व्यहवृत थी। इनका मुखिया या राजा 'अली' कहा जाता था, जो मेघ होता था।
थारू जाति मुरंग के निकट मकवानपुर के मैदानी इलाकों में रहती थी। मोरंग के पूर्व में विजयपुर में मुख्यतः कोच और पहाड़ों के निचले भागों में 'मेघ' निवास करते थे।
मूल पुस्तक पर्शियन भाषा में है। पर्शियन में हिंदी के ग हेतु कई जगह ज का प्रयोग किया है। अंग्रेजी अनुवादक ने उसे कई जगह अंग्रेजी में meg और कई जगह mej लिखा है। अतः इससे भ्रम पैदा न हो इस हेतु टिपण्णी देकर स्पष्ट किया गया है कि यह एक ही शब्द है और मेघों के सम्बोधानार्थ प्रयुक्त है। यह भी स्पष्ट किया गया है कि भाषा की वर्तनी भिन्नता के कारण कई जगह मेग को mej, mech, meg, megh आदि शब्दों से दर्ज किया है।
(मेघ : तबाकती-ए-नसीरी के अंग्रेजी अनुवाद में Bibliotheca Indica के पेज 560 पर मेघों पर की गयी टिपण्णी-
"The 'Tharoo' [Tiharu] caste, according to Buchanan, composes the greatest portion of the population that are dwellers in the plain of "Saptari," in Makwanpur adjoining the Murang on the north-west ; and the inhabitants of the Murang to the east of Bijaipur [Wijayapur] are chiefly Konch, and on the lower hills are many of the Megh, Mej, or Megh, tribe.")
एक बात यहाँ और दोहराना चाहूँगा, जो मैंने 'मेघवंश:इतिहास और संस्कृति' में कही है, वह यह है कि मेघ लोग अगर वास्तव में अपना इतिहास ढूंढ़ना चाहते है तो उन्हें भारत के पडौसी देशों के इतिहास और साहित्य में रूचि जागृत करनी पड़ेगी। हिन्दू ग्रंथों में आपका उल्लेख नगण्य है तो पर्शियन, तुर्की, चीनी और अरबी आदि साहित्य में विपुल है।
इसी कड़ी में निम्नोक्त सन्दर्भ गहराई से परखिये और बीच की अवधि के इतिहास की रिक्तता को भरिये।
ये सन्दर्भ 'Bibliotheca Indica' से है, जो Asiatic Society of Bengal द्वारा सन 1881 में प्रकाशित की गयी। जिसमें Tabakat-I-Nasiri का अंग्रेजी अनुवाद् प्रकाशित किया गया।
"Tabakat-I-Nasiri: A General History of the Muhammdan Dynasties of Asia including Hindustan from A.H. 194 (810AD) to A.H. 658 (1260 AD) and irruption of the infidel Mughals into Islam"
By- The Maulana Minhaj-ud-Din-Abu-Umar-I-Usman.
Translated from original Presian Manuscripts By Major H. G. Ravrty, Vol.1,
Printed by Gilbert &Rivington,1881 in Bibliotheca Indica : A collection of Oriental Works, Published by The Asiatic Society of Bengal, Translation of the Tabakat-I-Nasiri of the Moulana Minhaj-I-Saraj, Abu Umar-I-Usman.
पृष्ठ संख्या प्रत्येक उद्ध्तरण में दे दी गयी है।
......tion to the presence of Sultan Kutb-ud-Din, I-bak. After some years had passed away4, and he had ascer tained the state of the different mountain tracts of Turkis tan and Tibbat to the eastward of Lakhanawati5, the ambition of seizing the country of Turkistan and Tibbat began to torment his brain ; and he had an army got ready, and about 10,000 horse were organized. In the different parts of those mountains which lie between Tibbat and the country of Lakhanawati are three races of people, one called the Kunch6, the second the Mej [Meg], and the third the Tiharu ; and all have Turk countenances. They have a different idiom too, between the language of Hind and Turk7. One of the chiefs of the tribes of Kunch and Mej, whom they were wont to call 'Ali, the Mej, fell into the hands of Muhammad-i-Bakht-yar, the Khalj, and, at his hand also, the former adopted the Muhammadan faith.
He agreed to conduct Muhammad-i-Bakht-yar into those hills, and act as guide ; and he brought the latter to a place where there is a city, the name of which is Burdhan [kot]8. They relate, after this manner, that, in ancient times, Shah Gushtasib9 returned from the country of Chin, and came towards Kamrud, and, by that route, got into Hin dustan, and founded that city [Burdhan-kot]. A river flows in front of that place, of vast magnitude, the name of which is Beg-mati1; and, when it enters the country of Hindustan, they style it, in the Hindu! dialect, Samund 2 [ocean] ; and, in magnitude, breadth, and depth, it is three times more than the river Gang. To the banks of this river Muhammad-i-Bakht-yar came; and 'All, the Mej, joined the army of Islam ; and, for a period of ten days, he took the army up the river among the mountains, until he brought it to a place where, from remote times, they had built a bridge of hewn stone, and consisting of upwards of twenty arches'. After the army
Ref bibliothico Indica pp 560-561
Footnote at page 560 mad-i-Sam, to whom he appears to have been most loyal [see page 571]. He had no occasion whatever to issue money in the name of Malik Kutb-ud- Din, who was still a slave ; and MuJiammad-i-Bakit-yar only died the same year in which Sultan Mu'izz-ud-Din was himself assassinated. See Thomas : "PathAn Kings of Dehli," page no, and note and Elliot : India, vol. li. page 309. 4 This expedition must have been undertaken towards the close of the year 601 H. After Mufcammad-i-Bakllt-yar had acquired great power and grandeur, he turned his thoughts to the acquirement of further territory in Tibbat and Turkistan without probably being aware of the distance to be traversed, and the difficulties to be surmounted. He set out with a force of about 12,000 horse accordiig to the generality of accounts, but the Raujat-us- Safa has " 10,000 horse, and 30,000 foot 1" which is certainly incorrect. Tibbat was a well-known name in our author's time even, and yet Hamilton in his " Description of Hindostan," vol. ii. page 566, makes the rash statement that it does not appear that the name Tibet is anywhere in general use to designate the province according to the European acceptation of the word ! This may be true as to Tibet, for the country here referred to is written and called Tibbat. The "Tharoo" [Tiharu] caste, according to Buchanan, composes the greatest portion of the population that are dwellers in the plain of "Saptari," in MakwanpQr adjoining the MCrang on the north-west ; and the inhabitants of the MOrang to the east of Bijaipur [Wijayapur] are chiefly Kon£h, and on the lower hills are many of the Megh, Mej, or Megh, tribe. 1 Our author's ideas of east and west are rather obscure, as may be noticed at page 431. In this instance he means to the north and north-east. • In some copies the nasal n is left out Kuch.. ' In some of the more modern copies of the text, "Hind and Titiat."
Footnote at page 561- * The oldest and best copies generally have as above, but two add kot, and one copy gives the vowel points. The Zubdat-ut-Tawarilfji also has Burdhan twice. The other copies collated have Murdhan and Murdhan-kot, and the printed text, in a note, has Durdhan [Wurdhan ?] as well as Burdhan. 9 Some copies have Giisjjtasib and some Garshasib, and one has Gudarz. In the Iranian records Garghasib, son of Zau, is not mentioned as having had aught to do with Hind or Chin. The wars of Gushtasib with Arjasib, son of Afrasiyab, King of Turan, are narrated, but there is no mention of Gusljtasib's going into Turan or Chin ; but his son, Isfandiyar, according to the tradition, reduced the sovereign of Hind to submission, and also invaded Chin. In the account of the reign of Kai-Khusrau, Gudarz, with Rustam and GIw, invaded Turkistan to revenge a previous defeat sustained from Afrasiyab who was aided on this occasion by the troops of Suklab and Chin, and Shankal. sovereign of Hind, was slain by the hand of Rustam. Our author, in another place, states that Gushtasib, who had gone into Chin by that route, returned into Hind by way of the city of Kamrud, and that up to the period of the invasion of Kamrud by Ikhtiyar-ud-Din, Yuz-Bak-i-Tughril Khan, governor of LakhanawatI — some years after Muhammad-i-Bakht-yar's expedition — twelve hundred "hoards" of treasure, all still sealed as when left there by Giishtasib, fell into the hands of the Musalmans ! 1 The name of this river in the best and oldest copies is as above, but some others, the next best copies, have Beg-hati, Bak-mati, or Bag-mati, and others have Bang-mati, Mag-madl, and Nang-mati, or Nag-mati. Bag-mati is not an uncommon name for a river, and is applied to more than one. The river of Nipal, which lower down is called the Grandhak, is called Bag-mati. J Samund or Samudr or Samudra, the ocean. One of the best copies of the text has "when it enters the ocean or sea \\>_jt\ of Hindustan," &c. * The reader cannot fail to notice that considerable discrepancy exists here in our author's statements respecting this river and bridge. From what he (continue on page 562) says about the size we are led to conclude that this river, Beg-mati or Bek- matt, must be the Brahma-putr ; but what part of it is the question to be solved. When he adds that it is more than three times broader and deeper than the Gang— and, of course, equally liable to inundation — the idea of its being spanned by a stone bridge of above twenty [i. e. between twenty and twenty-five] arches, shows that the narrator, or his informant, must have grossly exaggerated. We may suppose our author's idea of the size of the Gang was derived from what he had seen of that river on his journey from Dihll to Lakhanawati ; but, if we only take its average breadth at Banaras during the height of the hot season, viz. 1500 feet, our author's river will be a mile or more in breadth ; and, if wc believe that this bridge consisted of even twenty-five arches, each of them would be above seventy yards in the span. Is this at all probable ? At page 561, our author says 'Alt, the Mej, brought them to a place where stood the town of Burdhan or Abuidhan-kot, in front of which flows the mighty river Beg-mati, which, on entering Hindustan, they call the Samund, but the great bridge is not mentioned in connexion with it. He then says that 'Alt, the Mcj, joined the Musalman forces on the banks of this river, and then conducted them ' ' up the river for a period of ten days' journey " [some 200 miles or more, even at the low computation of twenty miles a day for cavalry without incumbrance, would have brought them near to the Sanpu or upper part of the Brahma-putr in Tibbat], and then, not before, they reached this great bridge, but no river is mentioned. At page 565, it is said that after passing this great river the forces pushed on for a further period of fifteen days [200 or 250 miles, even allowing for the extra difficulty of the country] when the open country of Tibbat was reached. Here it would appear that 'Alt, the Mej, joined them, beyond the territory of the Rajah of Kamrud, and the lattcr's message to Muhammad, son of Bakht-yar, confirms it ; but, farther on [page 569], this great bridge is said to be in [but probably adjoining] the Kamrud territory, or words to that effect. The boundaries of Kamrud are very loosely described by Musalman authors, and they apply the name to all the country between the northern frontiers of Muhammadan Bangalah and the hills of Bhutan, its southern boundary being where the Lakhiyah river separates from the Brahma-putr. From the distinct mention of Tibbat and Turkistan, by others as well as by our author, together with other observations made by him, it is evident that Muhammad, son of Bakht-yar — and his forces — marched from Dtw-kot, or Dib-kot, in Dtnja-pur district, the most important post on the northern frontier of his territory, keeping the country of the Rajah of Kamrud on his right hand, and proceeding along the bank of the river Tfstah, through Sikhim, the tracts inhabited by the Kunch, Mcj, and Tiharii, to Burdhan-kot. They were not in the territory of the Rajah of Kamrud, as his message shows ; yet, when the retreat is mentioned, the Musalmans were, invested in the idol- temple by his people, but no reference is made to this temple's being near the bridge in the account of their advance. Pushing onwards from Burdhan-kot, which may have been situated on a river, on the tenth day the Musalmans reached the bank of the great river where was the bridge of stone " of above twenty arches." If the town of Burdhan or Abuidhan-kot was situated on the farther side of the great bridge, it is strange Muhammad, son of Bakht-yar,