disturbed state of Kabul (see his letters to Humarun and Khwaia Kalan written in 935 AH.).1
It is not easy to follow the dates of events in 935 AH. because in many instances only the day of the week or a " next day " is entered. I am far from sure that one passage at least now found s.a. 935 AH. does not belong to 934AH. It is not in the Hai. Codex (where its place would have been on f. 363/?), and, so far as I can see, does not fit with the dates of 935 AH. It will be considered with least trouble with its context and my notes (q.v. f. 363^ and ff. 366-366^).
b. Remarks on the lacuna.
One interesting biographical topic is likely to have found mention in the missing record, vis. the family difficulties which led to 'Askarl's supersession by Kamran in the government of Multan (f. 359)-
Another is the light an account of the second illness of 934 AH. might have thrown on a considerable part of the Collection of verses already written in Hindustan and now known to us as the Rampiir Diwan. The Bdbur-ndma allows the dates of much of its contents to be known, but there remain poems which seem prompted by the self-examination of some illness not found in the B.N. It contains the metrical version of Khwaja 'Ubaidu'l -lah's Walidiyyah of which Babur writes on f. 346 and it is dated Monday Rabl' II. 15th 935AH. (Dec. 29th 1528AD.). I surmise that the reflective verses following the Walidiyyah belong to the 40 days' illness of 934AH. i.e. were composed in the period of the lacuna. The Collection, as it is in the "Rampur Diwan", went to a friend who was probably Khwaja Kalan ; it may have been the only such collection made by Babur. No other copy of it has so far been found. It has the character of an individual rdft with verses specially addressed to its recipient. Any light upon it which may have vanished with pages of 934AH. is an appreciable loss.
1 One historian, Ahmad-i-yadgar states in his Tarlkh-i-salatln-i-afaghina that Babur went to Labor immediately after his capture of Chandirl, and on his return journey to Agra suppressed in the Panj-ab a lising of the Mundahar (or, Mandhar) Rajputs. His date is discredited by Babur's existing narrative of 934 ah. as also by the absence in 935 ah. of allusion to either episode. My husband who has considered the matter, advises me that the Labor visit may have been made in 936 or early in 937 ah. [These area period of which the record is lost or, less probably, was not written.]
