Talk:Jahangir

Completing the picture?
I have tried to merge what seem like competing versions. Let's try to synthesize and provide a complete picture rather than trying to bludgeon each other's views out of existence, huh? &mdash;iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 21:19, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

Old Merge
This and Emperor Jahangir need to be merged. Also there is a lost and orphaned image I found in the page history. MeltBanana 23:55, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * This merger appears to have been completed - as the Emperor Jahangir link autodirects to here.

 Discuss 2010 merger below --Haruth (talk) 18:52, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Irrelevant
The excerpt from "scholarship" given at the end of the article is completely unneccesary and biased. It is reflecting a very trivial view by and author that obviously has an agenda, and doesn't add anything worthwhile to the content of the article (since it discusses a single, most likely mythical, event.)03:24, 23 October 2005


 * very much agree with your comments and your deletion.--Nemonoman 01:11, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Spelling of Mughal
I will replace "Muġal Empire" with "Mughal Empire" as the latter spelling is much more widely accepted. Mar de Sin  Speak up!  03:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Nur Jahan section
The section about Nur Jahan seems to be a bit biased. Can anyone change it so it is bit more neutral? --Eriko-nee (talk) 01:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Eriko-nee

Revolt section
I corrected a few mistakes and tried to harmonize the transliteration for Jahangir's son Khusrau Mirza: the name Khosrau has had through history many spellings: Khusraw, Khosraw, Khusrau, Khusro. The wikipedia article is titled Khusrau, in the Jahangir article Khusraw is mostly used. I also found Khusro in the artcle Mariam-uz-Zamani. (Shas3 (talk) 06:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC))

The Revolt section also states "The victorious Jahangir Only 16 years of age, ordered...". In 1594, Jahangir born in 1569 must have been around 25, not 16. Can someone clarify this section? It may be a confusion with Aurangzeb, Jahangir's grandson, who (at 16) also won a battle here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marq au (talk • contribs) 02:31, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I also corrected two links in this section that pointed to Bandela instead of Bundela. Marq au (talk) 02:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Merger Proposal
Since Jahangir ruled the Mughal_empire_after_akbar, it would seem sensible to merge the Empire Article with this one. --Haruth (talk) 18:34, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Agree. Actaully, the article Mughal empire after akbar can simply be deleted and redirected, as it does not add any thing that can be 'merged'. Geeteshgadkari (talk) 14:25, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Agree. There is an article about Moguls in general. Issues evolving after Akbar's death shold be posted there. The current article focuses very much on Jahangir anyway. --Peter Walt A. (talk) 16:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Disagree. What is the issue? Is it Jahangir or post Akbar period? Later Mughals from Bahadur Shah I are included into separate section by the historians. Akbar as an Emperor was definitely a submit in Indian history. However, I find the very idea of 'Mughal Empire After Akabr' a novelty in itself. It can be part of new essay in itself. Therefore, the need is to understand that is the very idea of having an article Mughal Empire after Akbar historically right? What will be the situation if such a write up developed at all, vis-i-vis Later Mughals. Later Mughals is an established concept.

Every concept is a creation of Historians. I do not believe Wikipedia is a Historian. Secondly, it is policy of Wikipedia as such not to start any research or entertain any newly researched issue. Hence, merging disapproved.

I must say that very concept should be scrapped. --Sumir 09:23, 18 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sumir Sharma (talk • contribs)
 * @Sumir: May I point out that, contrary to your belief, Wikipedia is not a historian or a platform for novel ideas. Original research is a criterion for deletion. So, if you think the article is "novel", then as per Wikipedia policy, it should be deleted. Reading WP:NOT will be helpful. Geeteshgadkari (talk) 00:30, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Resolved. The article Mughal empire after akbar has been deleted and redirected to Mughal Empire. --Geeteshgadkari (talk) 00:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Toehold for the British?
Puzzling to see no reference to this in the article....
 * "In 1615, Sir Thomas Roe was instructed by James I to visit the Mughal Emperor Nuruddin Salim Jahangir (r. 1605 - 1627) to arrange for a commercial treaty which would give the Company exclusive rights to reside and build factories in Surat and other areas. In return, the Company offered to provide the Emperor with goods and rarities from the European market. This mission was highly successful as Jahangir sent a letter to James through Sir Thomas Roe: "
 * {{Quote|Upon which assurance of your royal love I have given my general command to all the kingdoms and ports of my dominions to receive all the merchants of the English nation as the subjects of my friend; that in what place soever they choose to live, they may have free liberty without any restraint; and at what port soever they shall arrive, that neither Portugal nor any other shall dare to molest their quiet; and in what city soever they shall have residence, I have commanded all my governors and captains to give them freedom answerable to their own desires; to sell, buy, and to transport into their country at their pleasure." (from East India Company) Snori (talk) 14:56, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

don't get it
" and the Sikh Guru Arjan (the religious fifth guru) tortured for five days until he had disappeared while taking a bath in a river—" I would think he wouldn't let himself be tortured, he would be in prison. True? How did he get to the river? "had disappeared" is pluperfect and usually means one past action that preceded another, what's the subsequent past action to the disappearance? Also usually "Xing somebody until they Y" means that X caused Y. Maybe "until" is the wrong word?

"In this state, Jahangir was also open to the influence of his wives, a weakness exploited by many. Because of this constant inebriated state, Nur Jahan, the favourite wife of Jahangir, became the actual power behind the throne." the sentence right before "in this state" should say what the state is; "this" always refers to something in the immediate area. The reference to inebration should come before it not after it. 4.249.63.144 (talk) 21:14, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Language Proficiency
According to his memoirs, Jahangir was fluent in Turkish as well (I presume the Chagatai dialect), in addition to his knowledge of Persian and Hindi.

From Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri, Translated by Rogers and Beveridge, London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1909-1914, pp. 87-88 (in the online copy linked in the article).

"In connection with the account of Kabul the com­mentaries of Babur passed in view before me. These were in his own handwriting, except four sections that I wrote myself. At the end of the said sections a sentence was written by me also in the Turki character, so that it might be known that these four sections were written by me in my own hand. Notwithstanding that I grew up in Hindustan, I am not ignorant of Turki speech and writing."

Can we add this information to a related section of the article? I also wonder if he knew other local or regional languages, as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.195.176.50 (talk) 17:57, 3 August 2018‎ (UTC)

Many references deleted on 25 October 2015
On 25 October 2015, approximately 50 references were deleted from this article by 106.194.133.191. Is there any good reason for it? The IP made a few edits that could be constructive, but mostly just deleted references without any explanation. Maybe we try to put it back. Krubo (talk) 19:59, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism to birthdate and birthplace
An anonymous user keeps changing Jahangir's birthdate and birthplace to respectively "14 December 1569" and "Peshawar, North Western frontier province, British India(Now in-Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,Pakistan". He always gives the comment "This is the truth" with his edits, which clearly identifies the editor as the same person regardless of the continually changing anonymous IP-adress. These edits are untruth and clear vandalism and are - given the rpeated character - not good faith edits. -- fdewaele, 4 November 2018, 17:15 CET.

Some action should be taken immediately! Balasoreanishman (talk) 16:59, 16 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Balasoreanishman - this is a post from 2018 - Arjayay (talk) 18:06, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Need Subject Matter Expert
In the same paragraph at the top of the Nur Jahan section, we have these two statements: "...Jahangir yearned for [Mehr Un Nisaa] much earlier than her wedding to Sher Afgan... most travellers' reports say that [Jahangir] met [Mehr Un Nisaa] after Sher Afgan's death." The article overall seems to suffer from this problem, but it is rarely so obvious. Is there a consensus view? We state both with equal authority and, unless Jahangir had a time machine, it cannot be both. I do not have the knowledge or the sources to find out which is right and correct the article. Last1in (talk) 18:19, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Art section
I just added some citations from reputable books to a few paragraphs in the Art section of this page, but don't have the time to make all the edits that are required for a properly supported section. This excerpt (...my liking for painting and my practice in judging it have arrived at such point when any work is brought before me, either of deceased artists or of those of the present day, without the names being told me, I say on the spur of the moment that is the work of such and such a man. And if there be a picture containing many portraits and each face is the work of a different master, I can discover which face is the work of each of them. If any other person has put in the eye and eyebrow of a face, I can perceive whose work the original face is and who has painted the eye and eyebrow.) is quoted in full without any source as to where/when Jahangir said it. Presumably the Jahangirnama? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frusticolus (talk • contribs) 16:37, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Rebellion
Could anyone please add rebellion of Prince Salim against Akbar? I'm unable to word them well. You can find information from here:
 * https://archive.org/details/jahangirnamamemo00jaha/page/8/mode/2up Manavati (talk) 17:27, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

The brutality of reign never mentioned
I find it interesting that any of the listings of the various Mughal rulers of India never lists the brutality of their reign. No mention that Jahangir planned his fathers death to take over. He blinded his own son and not to mentioned how many he has skinned to include Guru Arian Dev Ji, that lead to hostilities/war between Mughals and Sikhs. 70.106.201.136 (talk) 23:39, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

The page shortened?
It seems that the article has been heavily edited, to make it shorter, with less pictures. Makes it less informative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathularog (talk • contribs) 14:46, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Jahangir parents’ name is wrong…
Please see the parents’ name of Jahangir… it’s written Saif and Kareena. Check the info on the page. 202.142.118.228 (talk) 16:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I quickly fixed it. Thanks for the information! WatkynBassett (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Battles
Battles fought by jahangir : 1. Battle of Dewair 103.70.128.41 (talk) 08:07, 28 December 2022 (UTC)