47. The ‘old city’ was that of Kutb-ud-din and Iltutmish; the ’new city’ was that of Firoz Shah, which partly coincided with the existing city, and partly lay to the south, outside the Delhi gate.
48. In A.D. 1303.
49. Now in the Saharanpur district.
50. This is a repetition of the statement made above. According to Encycl. Brit., ed. 1910, Timur returned to his capital in April not May.
51. Bajazet, or more accurately Bayazid I, was defeated by Timur at the battle of Angora in 1402, and died the following year. The story of his confinement in an iron cage is discredited by modern critics, though Gibbon (chapter 65) shows that it is supported by much good evidence. Anatolia is a synonym for Asia Minor. It is a vague term, the Greek equivalent of ‘the Levant’.
52. Sebaste, also called Elaeusa or Ayash, was in Cilicia.
53. Otherwise called Sihon, or Syr Darya.
54. Two autobiographical works, the Malfuzat and the Tuzukat, are attributed to Timur and probably were composed under his direction. The latter was translated by Major Davey (Oxford, 1783), and the former, in part, by Major Stewart (Or. Transl. Fund, 1830). An independent version of the portion of the Malfuzat relating to India will be found in E. & D., iii, pp. 389-477.
55. Ali Yazdi, commonly called Sharaf-ud-din, author of the Zafarnama in Persian (see ante, chapter 68, note 46), Ibn Arabshah, in an Arabic work, describes Timur from a hostile point of view. (Encycl. Brit., 11th ed., s. v. ’Timur’).
56. It is impossible within the limits of a note to discuss the problem of the origin of the gipsies. Much has been written about it, though nothing quite satisfactory. The gipsy, or Romany, language (Romani chiv, or ‘tongue’) certainly is closely related to, though not derived from, the existing languages of Northern India. Some of the forms are very archaic. A valuable English-Gipsy vocabulary compiled by Mr. (Sir George) and Mrs. Grierson was published in Ind. Ant., vols. xv, xvi (1886,1887). The author’s theory does not tally with the facts. Gipsies existed in Persia and Europe long before Timur’s time. It is practically certain that they did not come through Egypt. The article ‘Gypsies’ by F. H. Groome in Chambers’s Encycl. (1904) is good, and seems to the editor to be preferable to Dr. Gaster’s article ‘Gipsies’ in Encycl. Brit., 11th ed., 1910.
57. Before the Codes were passed (1859-1861) the criminal law administered in India was, in the main, that of the Muhammadans, and each judge’s court had a Muhammadan law officer attached, who pronounced a ‘fatwa’, or decision, intimating the law applicable to the case, and the penalty which might be inflicted. Several examples of these ‘fatwas’ will be found among the papers bound up with the author’s ‘Ramaseeana’.
58. See Koran, chapter 2. [W. H. S.] The passage is the second sentence in chapter 2. The wording, as quoted, differs slightly from Sale’s version.