Talk:Babur

Most Powerful.

@Noorullah21 The second source does say that he was the most powerful king in the region. I'll wait for the answer. 𝐀𝐃𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐓𝐘𝐀 ♘♞ 13:17, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I think that source should be removed, it's from the 1910's. See WP:RAJ and/or WP:AGEMATTERS. Otherwise, do the other sources corroborate it? Noorullah (talk) 15:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Alright 👍 𝐀𝐃𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐓𝐘𝐀 ♘♞ 06:22, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Request for comment on lead image for Babur

User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil Which of these two paintings (1:British Museum, 2:Smithsonian) would be more appropriate as the lead image for the article on Babur (1483–1530), the Turco-Mongol founder of the Mughal Empire? पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 13:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC) पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 13:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Discussion

• The Second painting (Smithsonian) is more appropriate in my opinion (as the nominator). Rationale:
  

1) The first painting (British Museum) (c.1605-10) is often presented as a depiction of Babur ("Portrait of the Mughal emperor Babur" British Museum), but often with many caveats:

a) It is considered as an "idealized portrait" (British Museum), and is an orphaned miniature from an unknown work, an "album leaf" (Mughal Miniatures, p.56, image 31).

b) Attribution is disputed: the identification with Babur is sometimes considered as "speculative", through an undated inscription in the margin, and the person in the painting is sometimes only identified as a "seated Prince in Persian costume": "Seated Prince in Persian costume, reading. Speculatively identified in the margin as Bābur" (Mughal Miniatures, p.56, image 31) "Marginal inscription identifies figure as 'Shah Babur'" (British Museum)

c) The pose (man on a chair, cross-legged, reading a book), the costume and throne are Persian, rather than Mughal: "Seated prince in Persian costume, reading." (Mughal Miniatures, p.56), "The Emperor's pose, costume and throne follows a Persian model" (The Indian heritage, Item 38), "The style of costume and the turban are Persian" (Paintings from the Muslim courts of India, p.66 item 102) "An Iranian-inspired Indian picture from the seventeenth century, of the first Mughal Emperor Babur, dressed in seventeeth century Iranian clothing and sitting in a chair reading a book with visible text, one foot free of its slipper and resting on the other knee" p.333, note 153

d) The style of the painting itself is Persian: "If the painting is not by Aqā Rizā himself, it is characteristic of the contemporary Persian style which he introduced." (Paintings from the Muslim courts of India, p.66 item 102)

e) The scene (cross-legged, reading a book in slippers) might not be the best to convey the regalian attributes of an emperor...

2) On the contrary, the second painting (Smithsonian) (c.1640), belongs to a well-known Mughal album (Late Shah Jahan Album), commissioned by a descendant of Babur (Shah Jahan).[1] It is characteristically Mughal in style (clothing, posture) and quite consistent with other known Mughal depictions of Babur:

a) It is a standard painting of Babur by the Mughal court, from the Late Shah Jahan Album, painted c. 1640 by commission of Babur’s great-great-grandson, Shah Jahan. (Smithsonian, "Babur and Humayun with Courtiers, from the Late Shah Jahan Album"[2]). It is often referenced ([3][4][5][6]...). Also in the same style: Louvre Museum [1]↗

b) The painting is consistent in iconography and style with other known Mughal depictions of Babur (see Paintings of Babur), particularly the numerous depictions of Babur from the Baburnama (1589-1595), commissioned by his grandson Akbar: [1]↗ [2]↗ [3]↗ [4]↗

c) It is one of the finest depictions of Babur from a secure Mughal work, in which he appears in a regalian posture.

3) For reference, no contemporary portraits of Babur have reached us [7], but several contemporary (life-time) portraits of his sons are known: Humayun: [1]↗[2]↗, Hindal: [3]↗

So, I would argue that the second painting is likely more authentic (commissioned by his own family) and more representative of typical Mughal depictions of Babur. This documented Mughal-style painting is arguably preferable to the "seated prince in Persian costume" with disputed attribution, as a representative image of Babur. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 13:18, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

• The Status quo version is better and the alternative isn't an improvement. Thanks! Nemov (talk) 13:06, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
• Very convenient that Pataliputra did not tag me, the person who reverted them when they attempted to add the Smithsonian image. Just like they conveniently cherrypicked part of the description in the original Babur image to push the Smithsonian image [8], uploaded by conveniently them (their ANI report shows a history of them preferring their own images above others). And they are still repeating the same invalid arguments here amongst others. And once again, they are abusing the RFC system (WP:RFCOPEN, see also [9]). Next time they engage in any of these tactics in the slighest, they will be reported again. --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:01, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
• Where is the WP:RFCBEFORE? If there is none (other than edit summaries), this should be procedurally closed and it discussed (ideally with less heat please). Kowal2701 (talk) 19:19, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

  RFCBEFORE is not technically mandatory. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:37, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

• Status quo: I agree with Nemov that the alterative is not an improvement. I think the current image has better contrast whereas the proposed alternative looks a bit flat. TarnishedPath^talk 04:29, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
• Add to article - not top, I would suggest at the Foreign relations section would improve the content and the odd layout there. The article would be better with this added as it's from a notable source, and the article is a bit heavy on military paintings. Cheers Markbassett (talk) 01:38, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
• Second image, per nom. However, if the editors opposing the change explain their reasoning rather than simply saying that it's not an improvement I'd be happy to reconsider. Alaexis_¿question? 09:04, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 June 2025

The translation from Turkic is partially incorrect. I therefore request correcting the translation of this verse in the section ‘Poetry’:

Change the following: I am become a desert wanderer for Islam, Having joined battle with infidels and Hindus I readied myself to become a martyr, God be thanked I am become a ghazi.

I am become a desert wanderer for Islam, Having joined battle with infidels and Hindus I readied myself to become a martyr, God be thanked I am become a ghazi.

to this:

Islam ichin avara-i yazi buldim, Kuffar u hind harbsazi buldim Jazm aylab idim uzni shahid olmaqqa, Amminna' lillahi ki gazi buldim

For Islam’s sake I wandered barren wastes; Against unbelievers and the land of Hind I mustered force. Having vowed to make myself a martyr, By God’s leave I took up the sword as a ghazi. 81.102.51.203 (talk) 08:32, 15 June 2025 (UTC)