I found the following sentence -
But there are some grains of fact, as the men whom he mentions Robert smith, John White, Thomas Roach and William Gates are all mentioned by Manucci as with Shah Jehan and Aurungzebe when Cambell was with Murad Baksh and Dara Shekoh, Smith and Roach also appear in the Surat Records in 1667 and 1672 and the son of the latter is mentioned in 1704.
It is being talked about the authenticity of a narrative. It turned out that the narrative can't be considered to be true. But there are little fact in the narrative mostly because some names mentioned in the narrative is also mentioned by Manucci. And that Cambell is the traveller whose narrative is being talked about.
I have problem understanding the meaning of the sentence, mostly because of the bold part of the sentence. I have problem parsing that part. Any help would be appreciated.
What I think it means -
"He (the narrator) mentioned the name of Robert smith, John White, Thomas Roach and William Gates, Shah Jehan and Aurungzebe. Manucci also mentioned the names of Robert smith, John White, Thomas Roach and William Gates. Not Shah Jehan and Aurungzebe. He (the narrator) mentioned Shah Jehan and Aurungzebe when Cambell was with Murad and Dara."