THIS is apropos of Khurran Azad Khan’s letter ‘Facts about Humayun’ (Aug 25) wherein he has sought clarification about certain facts narrated by Dr Mubarak Ali in his article (Young World) on the Mughal period of Indian history, specially King Humayun’s (1508-1556) adoption of Shiite faith.

In the first place I would like to say that this was not the only instance of its kind in history and least of all among Mughals that in order to save the sovereignty a king had adopted deception.

Humayun had in fact accepted Shiite interpretation of Islam as narrated by Gulbadan Begum, his erudite sister, in her much admired memoir as well as in ‘Ahwal-i-Humayun Padshah’. She said that when the forlorn king arrived in the Persian Court, he had with him merely 44 people, including two women: Hamida Begum and her lady-in-waiting.

Shah Tahmasp (1514-1574) of Persia initially provided full protocol to the uninvited guest. However, as narrated by Gulbadan Begum, “there were passionate differences which almost led to Humayun’s expulsion.

The alliance was finally established only when Humayun agreed to Persian interpretation of Islam and, ostensibly, become a Shia, even wearing their distinctive cap”.

Thereafter, not only was Humayun’s stay comfortable, when time was ripe the Shah provided him with a strong force to reconquer India.

Similar were the circumstances when Zaheeruddin Muhammad Babur (1483-1530) was defeated by Shabani Khan, an Uzbek, warrior who expelled him from his much cherished capital of Samarkand.

The dejected young Babur, when he left his forefather’s capital, had only 400 companions, no horse, no sword, no spear and no arrow; handing over his beloved sister Khanzada to the victor as per terms of the treaty of surrender.

It was Shah Ismail Safavi (1487-1524), the Persian king (father of Shah Tamasp), who routed the Uzbek Khan in the battle of Merv and helped Babur regain his lost throne of Samarkand as well as his adored sister Khanzada.

According to Babur Nama, the much-acclaimed autobiography of Babur, the king in order to secure support of Shah Ismail, had to accept the terms such as reading Khutba in his domain in the name of Shah and also allowed coins to be minted in his name.

The foremost interest of the ruler had always remained the safety of his crown at all costs, that is why it is said that the ‘king knows no kin’ and this is the lesson of history.

MANZOOR H. KURESHI Karachi