Which of the following statements is correct about the Ain? Statement A- Oral testimonies were immediately incorporated as “facts” in the chronicle. Statement B- In the quantitative sections, all numeric data were reproduced in words to minimize the chances of subsequent transcriptional errors. |
Only statement A is correct. Only statement B is correct. Both statements are correct. None of the statements is correct. |
Only statement B is correct. |
The correct answer is Option 2 - Only statement B is correct. Given statements: Statement A- Oral testimonies were immediately incorporated as “facts” in the chronicle. (Incorrect) Statement B- In the quantitative sections, all numeric data were reproduced in words to minimize the chances of subsequent transcriptional errors. (Correct) Correction in statement A- The oral testimonies were cross-checked and verified before being incorporated as “facts” in the chronicle. The Ain is made up of five books (daftars), of which the first three books describe the administration. The first book, called manzil-abadi, concerns the imperial household and its maintenance. The second book, sipah-abadi, covers the military and civil administration and the establishment of servants. This book includes notices and short biographical sketches of imperial officials (mansabdars), learned men, poets and artists. Although the Ain was officially sponsored to record detailed information to facilitate Emperor Akbar govern his empire, it was much more than a reproduction of official papers. That the manuscript was revised five times by the author would suggest a high degree of caution on the part of Abu’l Fazl and a search for authenticity. For instance, oral testimonies were cross-checked and verified before being incorporated as “facts” in the chronicle. In the quantitative sections, all numeric data were reproduced in words so as to minimise the chances of subsequent transcriptional errors. Historians who have carefully studied the Ain point out that it is not without its problems. Numerous errors in totalling have been detected. These are ascribed to simple slips of arithmetic or of transcription by Abu’l Fazl’s assistants. These are generally minor and do not detract from the overall quantitative veracity of the manuals. |