(March 28th) On Saturday the 7th of Rajab we dismounted 2 or 3 kurohs from Aud above the junction of the Gagar (Gogra) and Sird[a]. Till today Shaikh Bãyazìd will have been on the other side of the Sird[a] opposite Aud, sending letters to the Sultan and discussing with him, but the Sultan getting to know his deceitfulness, sent word to Qaracha at the Midday Prayer and made ready to cross the river. On Qaracha’s joining him, they crossed at once to where were some 50 horsemen with 3 or 4 elephants. These men could make no stand; they fled; a few having been dismounted, the heads cut off were sent in.” (emphasis added)
Babur further continued the journey:
“Following the Sultan there crossed over Bi-khub (var. Ni-khub) SI. and Tardi Beg (the brother) of Quj Beg, and Baba Chuhra (the Brave), and Baqi Shaghawal. Those who had crossed first and gone on, pursued Shaikh Bãyazìd till the Evening Prayer, but he flung himself into the jungle and escaped. Chin-timur dismounted late on the bank of standing-water, rode on at midnight after the rebel, went as much as 40 kurohs (80 m.), and came to where Shaikh Bayazld’s family and relations (nisba ?) had been; they however must have fled. He sent gallopers off in all directions from that place; Baqi Shaghawal and a few braves drove the enemy like sheep before them, overtook the family and brought in some Afghan prisoners.
We stayed a few days on that ground (near Aud) in order to settle the affairs of Aud. People praised the land lying along the Sird[a] 7 or 8 kurohs (14-16 m.) above Aud, saying it was hunting-ground. Mir Muhammad the raftsman was sent out and returned after looking at the crossings over the Gagar-water (Gogra) and the Sird[a]-water (Chauka?).
[April 2nd]. On Thursday the 12th of the month I rode out intending to hunt.”
(4) On March 28, 1528 Babur was far away from Ayodhyā
From an analysis of the itinerary of Babur we come to the following conclusions:
(i) Chin-timur Sultan was the leader of the military expedition against Bāyazīd, the Governor of Ayodhyā who was on the run and away from Ayodhyā.
(ii) Baqi Shaghawal like Tardi Beg was an ordinary Beg assisting Chin-timur and had no role to play at Ayodhyā as a governor or an army-commander.
(iii) On 27th Feb. 1528 Babur was at Kannauj, on 21st March he was at Lucknow and on 28th March, 1528 he was 2 or 3 kos from Aud above the junction of the Gogra and Sirda. There is no confluence of two rivers in the close vicinity of Ayodhyā. Aud in the Babur-nama or in the mediaeval literature is invariably not Ayodhyā. It is a vast track between Gomati and Sarayū rivers. This confluence of the two rivers Ghaghra (Sarayū) and Sarda (Sirda) still exists and is situated at a distance of 72 miles, i.e. 115 km from Ayodhyā
(iv) Thus, on 28th March, 1528 A.D. when Babur dismounted 2 or 3 kos from Aud above the confluence of the Ghaghra and Sarda rivers he was 115 km. away from Ayodhyā.
There Babur and his expedition team stayed for a few days to settle the affairs of Aud. What was this settling of the affairs of Aud? Here many historians have made flights of imagination. They have written that Babur went to Ayodhyā and on the advice of Musa Ashiqan he directed Mir Baqi to demolish the Janma-sthāna temple and build a mosque there. But this is totally improbable because the Governor or King at Ayodhyā was not a Hindu. He was Shaikh Bāyazīd who was an Afghan and now on the run. Therefore, Babur had to make arrangement for the successful chase of Biban and Bāyazīd and by deploying armed forces and officers to capture them he settled the affairs of Aud. Here Thackston’s translation makes the picture crystal clear. “Halt was called for a few days at this site in order to consolidate affairs in Oudh and that area.” Here the expression is ‘to consolidate affairs in Oudh and that area’. Consolidating affairs means making fool-proof arrangments against Bāyazīd, Biban and other Afghan ribel nobles. Had he appointed Baqi as the Governor of Ayodhyā he could have clearly written it, as he has done in case of Bāyazīd’s appointment.
(5) Babur’s good hunting ground was not in the vicinity of Ayodhyā
There he came to know through local residents that ‘the land lying along the Sirda 7 or 8 Kuroh (14-16 m.) above Aud’ was a good hunting ground’. Thus, this hunting ground was further away from Ayodhyā by 20-25 km. The total distance of this hunting ground (zamine-sikargahi) was almost 140 km. from Ayodhyā and it was near the confluence of Sarda and Ghaghra and not near Ayodhyā at all. It is the area under present Sitapur district which has got a vast tract of forest known as Naimisharanya where most of the Puranas were composed. In this area there could have been good ground for hunting. Ayodhyā or its vicinity could not have been a hunting ground because it was a flourishing town during the Gahadavāla and Delhi-Sultanate periods. This confusion has arisen because Aud or Oudh is invariably taken to be Ayodhyā. But Abdur Rahman Chisti in ‘Marat-i-Masudi’ and Ibn Battuta in the ‘Rahela’ take Oudh to mean the territory between the Gomati and Ghagra (Sarayū) rivers.
Therefore, it is an erroneous impression that Ayodhyā was a good hunting ground. In fact, Ayodhyā was one of the biggest towns of India as it is known from the testimony of Abul Fazl in Ain-i-Akbari. During the Sultnate period except a short interregnum Ayodhyā was the headquarters of Governors of Delhi Emperors and during the days of Muhammad binTughlaq it was so prosperous that it used to send grain to the famine stricken populace of the Doab and other parts of the country. From the following translation of Thackston, it is clear that fords were found in the river which could not be possible near Ayodhyā where there was deep water.
(6) Beveridge’s clarification on Babur’s stay in Oudh
Beveridge was the first person who made this clarification by writing
“I take this to be the Kali-Sarda-Chauka affluent of the Gogra and not its Sarju or Saru one. To so take it seems warranted by the contexts; there could be no need for the fords on the Sarju to be examined and its position is not suitable.” (p. 602 n.)
This confusion was created by the wrong reading of Sirda as Sirwa by John Leyden, Erskine and Elliot. Sushil Srivastava has rightly written in his book ‘The Disputed Mosque’:
“Leyden and the other two scholars were not aware that the river flowing by Ayodhya was the river Ghagra, called the Saryu by the local people. These scholars translated the Persian version of the memoirs of Babur, which is translation of the original Turki. Because of the script, they read:
In the Persian script, these letters appear similar. It is easy for a person who is not very familiar with any proper name to commit this mistake. As such, anyone can read:
A close reading of the text reveals that Babur described the river Sirda as shallow and with fords which could be used for crossing. The river Saryu (Ghagra) is deep and fast-flowing and the fords would be impassable. The river Sirda (Sarda) is, however, shallow and has fords. Beveridge translated the Turki manuscript of Babur’s memoirs and also acquainted herself well with the geography of the area around Faizabad. We can safely agree with her that Babur camped 72 miles north of Ayodhya, at the junction of the rivers Sarda and Ghagra, on 28 March 1528.”
Therefore, Prof. Shrivastava concluded that it is ‘doubtful that Babur ever came to Ayodhyā’.
(7) Babur’s journey to Oudh shown on maps
Similarly, one is grateful to Prof. R. Nath for the following map of Babur’s movements in the Oudh Region in 1528 A.D. in his book ‘Architecture of Baburi Masjid’ (p. 29):
Babur’s journey to Oudh (R. Nath).
Thus, in R. Nath’s map Babur’s location on 28th March, 1528 A.D. is at a distance of more than 100 km. from Ayodhyā.
Prof. Sushil Srivastava has candidly and vividly shown Babur’s encampment on 28th March, 1528 A.D. through the following map in his book ‘The Disputed Shrine’ (p. 68).
Babur’s journey to Oudh (Sushil Srivastava).
Babur’s march from Chanderi to Kannauj, Lucknow and Oudh based on the Babur-nama is prepared by us and shown below:
Babur’s journey to Oudh (present writer).
Now it establishes the fact that on 28th March, 1528 Bab
ur was 115 km. away from Ayodhyā and on 2nd April, 1528 when the sequence of journey was lost, he was 140 km. away from Ayodhyā and therefore there was no question of his visit to Ayodhyā. Baqi Shaghawal or Tashqindi, who was a junior army-officer assisting Chin-timur Sultan in the expedition against Bāyazīd and Biban, could never dare to break the army-command and go to Ayodhyā where he had no business because Bāyazīd and Biban were on the run and were far away from Ayodhyā.
(8) Missing pages of Babur’s diary
Unfortunately, the pages in Babur’s Diary from 3rd April to 17th September, 1528 are missing in all texts either on account of a storm on 24th May, 1529 or the privations suffered by Humayun’s library during his exile from Hindustan. Thackston, however, calls it ‘an unexplained break of five-and-a-half months occurs in the text at this point’. The implied meaning is that Babur himself did not write the diary for this period. Consequently, it has led to the opening of the floodgate of concocted stories resulting even in the imaginary bloodbath of thousands of persons at Ayodhyā.
Such stories like Babur’s attack on Ayodhyā cannot be true because Oudh was under the Muslim rule for 300 years and there was no Hindu king there during Babur’s reign. Therefore, there was no need of waging any war to capture Ayodhyā from any Hindu monarch. It was already under his domain and Bāyazīd had been appointed the Governor of Ayodhyā by Babur shortly after the battle of Panipat. Moreover, the Governor Bāyazīd had already rebelled and left Ayodhyā. Babur was after him in hot pursuit. Diversion to Ayodhyā would have served no strategic purpose. It could have antagonized a vast section of local populace and delayed the chase. Thus, there was no reason or occasion for Babur to visit or attack Ayodhyā.
(9) Babur’s movements during the period of missing pages restructured on the basis of subsequent entries
What Babur did during this period can be fairly built up. A.S. Beveridge points out that “much can be gleaned of Babur’s occupations during the 5½ months of the lacuna from his chronicle of 935 A.H. which makes several references to occurrences of ‘the previous year’ and also allows several inferences to be drawn. From this source it becomes known that the Afghan campaign, the record of which, is broken by the gap, was carried on.” If such references are put together it appears that Babur carried on his military operations against Afghans in the east and south Bihar as well. During this period of five and-a-half months he stayed at Jaunpur, Chausa, Buxar, Saran etc. in defeating and driving away the Afghans and compelling them to take shelter in eastern Bihar and Bengal and after settling the affairs of the eastern region Babur returned to Agra. Thus, Babur had some other agenda to follow and not to waste energy in antagonizing the vast multitude of his subjects whose hostility could have emboldened Bāyazīd to carry on the flag of revolt more vigorously. Beveridge has tried to fill the gap in the following manner:
(i) “Jaunpur (March 28th 1529 A.D.) To look at our ground of a year ago (yil-turgi yurt; i.e. close to the same day a year back) from which we had started for Jaunpur”.(folio. 365b)
(ii) “Chausa “(April 1st) we moved on, I going by boat, on Friday (Rajab 22nd). I landed opposite Chausa to look at the ground of a year ago (yit-turgi yurt) where the Sun had been eclipsed and a fast kept.(folio. 365 b)
During that year the Sun eclipse had taken place on the 10th May, 1528. From this confirmed date it is clear that Babur was at Chausa on 10th May, 1528. Thus, Babur’s mention of last year did not mean exactly one year but a round about figure.
(iii) Baksara (April 4th) – “On reaching the ground opposite Baksara (Buxar) where the army had been seated many days last year we went over to look at it.” ( f. 366)
(iv) Beveridge further writes that he swam the Ganges
“A year ago (yitur) an excursion had been made to look at the ground on which the camp now was, I passing through Gang swimming (? dastak bila), some coming mounted on horse, some on camels.” (f. 365 b)
(v) Babur bestowed Saran on a Farmuli Shaikhzada. From folio. 374b the following account is obtained:
“(May 8th 1529) Shah Muhammad (son) of Maruf to whom in last year’s campaign (934 H.) I had shown great favour and had given the Sãran-country, had done well on several occasions, twice fighting and overcoming his father.”
Here it is necessary to mention that Bāyazīd and Maruf Farmuli were brothers. Bāyazīd had joined Babur’s service in 1526 A.D. but revolted in the end of 1527 A.D. He had opposed Mughal army near Kannary. Maruf had never joined Babur’s service; though he was rebel against Ibrahim Lodi and Biban. But his two sons Muhammad and Mūsa had joined the Mughal service.
(vi) From folio 377 of his Memoirs it is known:
(May 29th 1529 A.D.)- “Today at the other Prayer a special dress of honour and a tipuchaq horse were bestowed on Shah Muhammad (son) of Maruf Farmuli, and leave to go was given. As had been done last year (934 H.) an allowance from Saran and Kundpla was bestowed on him for the maintenance of quiver wearers.”
Thus, from the above scrutiny it appears that after the hunt on 2nd April, 1528 at a distance of 140 k.m. from Ayodhyā, Babur went to Jaunpur, Chausa and Buxer in the pursuit of Bāyazīd and Biban. After bestowing Saran on Shah Muhammad in June 1528 A.D. he returned to Agra, when rains set in.
On account of the following misplaced doubtful passage of Beveridge in Babur-nama some confusion has been created by her and a few historians:
“After spending several days pleasantly in that place where there are gardens, running-waters, well-designed buildings, trees, particularly mango-trees, and various birds of coloured plumage, I ordered the march to be towards Ghazipur.”
It has been completely ignored by Wheeler M. Thackston in “The Babur-nama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor”, which has been superbly edited by him. Even if it is accepted that it is a genuine passage of the Babur-nama, the identification of this place with Ayodhyā is misconceived because Babur had no occasion to visit Ayodhyā. The place may be identified with Jaunpur where he had gone in 934 H and which had all the beautiful objects mentioned here, as it was the capital of the Shirqi dynasty for almost a hundred years only a half century ago.
(10) Ferishta’s History of Hindostan
Ferishta wrote the History of Hindostan up to the death of Akbar during the reign of Jahangir in the early seventeenth century. It was meticulously translated by Alexander Dow, Esq. and published from London. Ferishta has informed that his account of ‘Baber’ is based on Abdur Rahim Khankhana’s Persian translation of Baburnama and narrated the following activities of the Emperor after the fall of Chanderi:
“Advices were, about this time, received, that a detachment, which had been sent against the Patan chiefs of the tribe of Lodi, who held still the Eastern provinces, was defeated. The King, therefore, left Ahmed, the son of Mahommed, and grandson of Sultan Nasir of Malava, who had now joined him, in the government of Chinderi, and marched in person towards Kinnoge. He met his defeated troops at Raberi, and arriving at the river, he threw over it a bridge of boats. His general Timur was ordered to cross in the front, the enemy being then on the opposite shore. After a faint resistance, the Patans gave way; but Timur pursuing them, took part of their baggage, and a great number of their women and children.
The King, after this victory, hunted, for a days, upon the banks of the Gang, and then returned to Agra. He appointed Zeman, one of the posterity of Timur, for he was the son of Budeli ul Zeman Mirza, of Balich, governor of the city, and, in the year 935, marched himself to survey the country. He first took the route of Gualier, and viewed there the fortifications, the stone elephant, and the place of the Raja. He then visited the gardens of Rehim, and ordered some flowers and plants, of an uncommon kind, to be transplanted to Agra. He went to worship in the great mosque, built by the Emperor Altumsh, for whose soul he ordered prayers to be read, and returned, by another way, to Agra”. (pp. 115-16)
It appears that Ferishta’s accounts are correct and in conformity with the details of the Baburnama. Ferishta does not
mention that many pages were missing in Khankhana’s Persian translation of Babur’s Memoirs. He narrates Babur’s pursuit of Afghan leaders, i.e. Bāyazid, Biban, etc. After initial success against them, Babur hunted, for a few days, upon the banks of the ‘Gang’ and then he returned to Agra. Here ‘Gang’ is in the sense of a general river, which is Sarayu in the present context. The missing pages, at present, are immediately after the hunt plan. Nevertheless, Ferishta informs that thereafter Babur returned to Agra and thus made no visit to Ayodhyā. He mentions the name of Timur (i.e. Chin-timur Sl. of Baburnama) as Babur’s general but does not mention the name of Mir Baqi or Baqi Shaghawal, as he was a petty troop-commander. After appointing Zeman, a descendant of Timur the Governor of Agra Babur marched himself to survey the country and visited the Gwalior palace of the (Hindu) Raja and the mosque built by the Emperor Iltutmish. All these accounts are in conformity with the details of the Memoirs of Babur and hence they are trustworthy. One should remember that Ferishta wrote the history within a hundred years of Babur’s death and it carries a lot of credibility. Thus, the missing pages do not allow the flight of imagination to Ayodhyā or the demolition of a temple or the construction of a mosque by Babur in the holy city.
(11) Babur’s second expedition against Bāyazīd in 1529 A.D.
After a lapse of 11 months on 23rd May, 1529 i.e. 15th day of the month of Ramzan one again finds the specific information of another expedition against Bāyazīd and Biban. On that day Babur marched from Kundbah (or Kundih) on the Sarayū river with a resolute mind to crush the traitors Biban and Bāyzid. After two night-halts by the way, Babur dismounted at a passage across the Saryu called Chupra-Chaturmuk on May 25, 1529 and sent a strong contingent to bar the river crossing of Bāyazīd and Biban. On the same night he faced a devastating storm which brought Babur’s tent down. Although Babur was unhurt, his books and manuscripts were drenched under rainwater. Babur could not sleep because he remained busy until the dawn with drying drenched documents.
Ayodhya Revisited Page 32