or indifferent about them. His interest becomes greater when he writes of Samana.
d. Punishment of the Munddhirs.
When Babur, on his return journey, reached Sihrind, he received a complaint from the QazI of Samana against one Mohan Mundahir (or Mundhdr) ■ Rajput who had attacked his estates, burning and plundering, and killed his son. Here-upon 'Ali-qull of Hamadan2 was sent with 3000 horse to avenge the Qazl's wrongs, and reached Mohan's village, in the Kaithal pargana, early in the morning when the cold was such that the archers " could not pull their bows." 3 A marriage had been celebrated over-night; the villagers, issuing from warm houses, shot such flights of arrows that the royal troops could make no stand ; many were killed and nothing was effected; they retired into the jungle, lit fires, warmed themselves (?), renewed the attack and were again repulsed. On hearing of their failure, Babur sent off, perhaps again from Sihrind, Tarsam Bahadur and Naurang Beg with 6000 horse and many elephants. This force reached the village at night and when marriage festivities were in progress. Towards morning it was formed into three divisions,4 one of which was ordered to go to the west of'the village and show itself. This having been done, the villagers advanced towards it, in the pride of their recent success. The royal troops, as ordered beforehand, turned their backs and fled, the Mundahirs pursuing them some two miles. Meantime Tarsam Bahadur had attacked and fired the village, killing many of its inhabitants. The pursuers on the west saw the flames of their burning homes, ran back and were intercepted on their way. About 1000 men, women and children were made prisoner ; there
1 Cf. G. of I. xvi, 55 ; Ibbetson's Report on Karnal.
* It is noticeable that no one of the three royal officers named as sent against Mohan Mundahir, is recognizable as mentioned in the Babur-nama. They may all have had local commands, and not have served further east. Perhaps this, their first appearance, points to the origin of the information as independent of Babur, but he might have been found to name them, if his diary were complete for 936 AH.
3 The E. and D. translation writes twice as though the inability to "pull" the bows were due to feebleness in the men, but an appropriate reading would refer the difficulty to the hardening of sinews in the composite Turkish bows, which prevented the archers from bending the bows for stringing.
4 One infers that fires were burned all night in the bivouac.
