(J. 'A/am Khan's action and failure}}
Here are the particulars : 'Alam Khan, after taking leave of me (in Kabul, 931 AH.), went off in that heat by double marches, regardless of those with him.2 As at the time I gave him leave to go, all the Auzbeg khans and sultans had laid siege to Balkh, I rode for Balkh as soon as I had given him his leave. On his reaching Lahor, he insisted to the begs, " You reinforce me ; the Padshah said so ; march along with me; let us get (Apaq) GhazI Khan to join us ; let us move on Dihll and Agra." Said they, " Trusting to what, will you join GhazI Khan ? Moreover the royal orders to us were, 'If at any time GhazI Khan has sent his younger brother Haji Khan with his son to Court, join him ; or do so, if he has sent them, by way of pledge, to Lahor; if he has done neither, do not join him.' You yourself only yesterday fought him and let him beat you ! Trusting to what, will you join him now ? Besides all this, it is not for your advantage to join him ! " Having said what-not of this sort, they refused 'Alam Khan. He did not fall in with their views, but sent his son Sher Khan to speak with Daulat Khan and with GhazI Khan, and afterwards all saw one another.
'Alam Khan took with him Dilawar Khan, who had come into Lahor two or three months earlier after his escape from prison ; he took also Mahmud Khan (son of) Khan-i-jahan,3 to
' The following section contains a later- addition to the diary summarizing the action of 'Alam Khan before and after Babur heard of the defeat from the trader he mentions. It refutes an opinion found here and there in European writings that Babur used and threw over 'Alam Khan. It and Babur's further narrative shew that 'Alam Khan had little valid backing in Hindustan, that he contributed nothing to Babur's success, and that no abstention by Babur from attack on Ibrahim would have set 'Alam Khan on the throne of Dihll. It and other records, Babur's and those of Afghan chroniclers, allow it to be said that if 'Alam Khan had been strong enough to accomplish his share of the compact that he should take and should rule Dihll, Babur would have kept to his share, namely, would have maintained supremacy in the Panj-ab. He advanced against Ibrahim only when 'Alam Khan had totally failed in arms and in securing adherence.
' This objurgation on over-rapid marching looks like the echo of complaint made to Babur by men of his own whom he had given to 'Alam Khan in Kabul.
3 Mahmud himself may have inherited his father's title Khan-i-jahan but a little further on he is specifically mentioned as the son of Khan-i-jahan, presumably because his father had been a more notable man than he was. Of his tribe it may be noted that the Haidarabad MS. uniformly writes Nuhani and not Luhani as is usual in European writings, and that it does so even when, as on f. 149A the word is applied to a trader. Concerning the tribe, family, or caste vide G. of I. s.n. Lohanas and Crooke I.e. s.n. Pathan, para. 21.
