The Bābur-nāma in English (Memoirs of Bābur)Babur, Emperor of Hindustan
History
The Bābur-nāma in English (Memoirs of Bābur)
Babur, Emperor of Hindustan
Babur, Emperor of Hindustan, 1483-1530; Mogul Empire
the date of the mutilation of Babur's Turki text back through its years
of safety, 1589 to 1555, to the period of Humayun's exile and its
dangers for camel-borne or deserted libraries.
d. _Two misinterpretations of lacunæ._
Not unnaturally the frequent interruptions of narrative caused by
_lacunæ_ have been misinterpreted occasionally, and sometimes
detractory comment has followed on Babur, ranking him below the
accomplished and lettered, steadfast and honest man he was. I select two
examples of this comment neither of which has a casual origin.
The first is from the _B.M. Cat. of Coins of the Shahs of Persia_ p.
xxiv, where after identifying a certain gold coin as shewing vassalage
by Babur to Isma`il _Safawi_, the compiler of the Catalogue notes, "We
can now understand the omission from Babar's 'Memoirs' of the
occurrences between 914 H. and 925 H." Can these words imply other than
that Babur suppressed mention of minting of the coins shewing
acknowledgment of Shi`a suzerainty? Leaving aside the delicate topic of
the detraction the quoted words imply, much negatives the surmise that
the gap is a deliberate "omission" of text:—(1) the duration of the
Shi`a alliance was 19-20 months of 917-918 AH. (p. 355), why omit the
peaceful or prideful and victorious record of some 9-10 years on its
either verge? (2) Babur's Transoxus campaign was an episode in the
struggle between Shaibaq Khan (Shaibani) _Auzbeg_ and Shah
Isma`il—between Sunni and Shi`a; how could "omission" from his book,
always a rare one, hide what multitudes knew already? "Omission" would
have proved a fiasco in another region than Central Asia, because the
Babur-Haidar story of the campaign, vassal-coinage included,[10] has
been brought into English literature by the English translation of the
_Tarikh-i rashidi_. Babur's frank and self-judging habit of mind would,
I think, lead him to write fully of the difficulties which compelled the
hated alliance and certainly he would tell of his own anger at the
conduct of the campaign by Isma`il's Commanders. The alliance was a
tactical mistake; it would have served Babur better to narrate its
failure.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account