The Mughal Era in India

Locked
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by brihaspati »

Everytime the upper GV moved into lower GV - they used internal factionalism, or sibling rivalry to replace the older regimes that resisted. The model perhaps follows from Krishna's clever replacement of Narakasur [identified as a possible ruler of the regions to the east of Karatoa - roughly halfway North South line through present North Bengal] with a descendant.

Turko Afghans did the same thing. Thye failed to advance beyond the soft belly of the remnant Pala's in south Bihar [there was no Bihar then as yet], after Bakhtyar's defeat at the hands of the North bengali rajas [possibly also an alliance with the Bhutanese and then Brahmaputra valley kings further east]. There remains a silence period in the islamic chroniclers triumphantilism for roughly 130-135 years from Bakhtyar's supposed raid into Navadwip. This wa sthe period of their consolidation in their relative stronghold in current Bihar region, and they called it Bihar because of the many Viharas. This was also the start of the Bengali-Bihari divide, as parts of the Hindu elite fled to the remote frontier and traditional rebel zones around present day Santhal Parganas, all the way across the Damodar-Suvarnarekha gap through western Rahr [red-soil] of Bengal down towards the border between Midnapore and Orissa. When pressed, local elite from more prosperous river-plain-banks areas always moved up the hill and bush country and allied with the tribes and maintained their semi-independent status. You will find this sort of thing going on from early Islamic period and hence the present day Jharkhand and western fringe of WB relatively mullah free.

So the Islamics of the sultanate phase could only inch towards Gaur [current Malda] and stay put for a century almost. The shrewder among them realized the impossibility and economic consequences of trying to islamize the western bush land as well as further east and south. Dhaka was essentially Vikram(ani)pur, and a main skandabar [garrison town] of the Pala-Sena period, and at least two descendants of the Senas[ Vishwaroop and Abhiroop] maintained Hindu power there for the better part of the century following early 1200's.

Then started the mega-drought period of medieval phase, and it is obvious in how the decentralization started in Sultanate, with Sharqi's of Jaunpur and the Bengal sultanate growing more assertive against Delhi. This was crucial phase for Bengal and Bihar [north-north-west sector onlee] locked in Islamics to have Hindu chiefs in alliance to survive against Delhi and the geography.

The Islamics basically at the earlier phase had converts from erstwhile Hindu chiefs - who probably tactically converted like the Jats in Punjab and Sindh, and most likely as a result of strategic calculations to gain Muslim military support against rival brothers or male claimants to leadership. Most "feudal Muslim" pucca khandanis of BD are descendants of such converts - and probably retain the same shenanigans, this time around bringing in their talent for betrayal and evil on behalf of islamism. There appears also to be some tactical house of Man Singh style transfer of female assets - at least one young beautiful widowed daughter of a Hindu member of the 12-Bhunya's alliance of Tueko-Afghan-Hindu anti-Mughal alliance, was "appropriated" by the son of Isha Khan - the dominant Islamic leader of the alliance.

The Mughals repeated the earlier technique : they expanded by promoting ambitious relatives of the 12-Bhunyas, like the nephew of the raja of Jessore, Pratapaditya.

The delta region was settled to the south and south east under a deliberate islamization programme by the Mughals. Vagabonds and adventurers of the Gulf region were given "pir/sufi" status and firmans to clear land and settle in the name of Islam. These saintly Islamic creatures inevitably appropriated local Hindu women of beauty and often even forced married women to be given up by their husbands and families. One such incident is captured in folklore of Mymensigh Geetika - the so-called Sonai-Madhav-Bhavna-Qazi episode. This expansionw as probably helped by the rehydration of the delta after retreat of the drought in the 1600's, but was also a deliberate islamization policy of the mughals opening up depopulated and forested lands in the south eastern half of the delta.

So the picture is complicated. The main centre of "kattar" Hindu resistance lay to the borderland of Bihar, Bengal and Orissa - the eastern part of current Jharkhand, while the plains elite split into two - one collaborated, while the other subverted or moved away to places more easily defended and less attractive for the well-hydrated woman and land seeking Islamist.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Singha »

a good number of small timer criminals, adventurers and merceneries seem to have bypassed the NI route and came directly across the sea from middle east to western india and then on to service of the deccan sultanates. these deccan sultans used to have small bands of arabi guards, harem eunuchs, storm troopers and such kind of like ottoman sultans using east europeans as their janissary household guards. The Janissaries were chosen before they reached adulthood from among the Christian population living in Anatolia and the Balkan peninsula.

similarly the current sultanate has chosen its inner circle not from son-of-soil-rustics but EJ converts, people who have married to foreign women or run some business abroad be it smuggling of relics to N number of things, crypto mughals who pine for the melodious women and kababs of lahore, ineffective "sufi" poets and writers, wild eyed economic iconoclasts looking for royal patronage of their mad ideas, political soldiers of fortune....
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by brihaspati »

They would never be integrated locally - by the local networks of pre-existing power, and hence dependent on the sultan for power. So safer bet given the murderous greed of the Islamic world of power.
devesh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5129
Joined: 17 Feb 2011 03:27

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by devesh »

Where informed minds meet, there is enlightenment. The narratives of the west and northwest India are much more famous than the eastern ones. We need to know more about that part.
Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6470
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Supratik »

As I have mentioned previously on this forum and that B has alluded to there is a study according to which what is now Bdesh was largely delta marsh land which was cleared for cultivation during the Muslim period which resulted in a boom in agriculture and population and Islamization. The North Bengal tribes (the predecessors of Kamptapuris) maintained their independence. Also we should not discount the Maratha raids in SW Bengal which lasted for a decade and was devastating and may have led to a shift in demography. Plus the bhakti movement (Chaitanya) was more concentrated in south WB which is supposed to have prevented conversions.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by brihaspati »

^^Yes, I have proposed this earlier also about Marathas. My own experience of the "badlands" suggests a singularly significant removal of the "mullah" and orphaned mosques along the way of the Maratha armies. For example, Muslim villages are there in Birbhum and Bankura [in fact in Birbhum one is connected to the legend of Rami-dwija-chandidas] but the mosques were singularly unattended, and azaan was absent on Fridays. This lay exactly on the route to the old Sultanate-Mughal route towards the famous [spiritual lore] "ghat" of Uddharanpur - the site of the murder by deception of Bhaskar Pandit by Alivardi. The Marathas had kept to the west of the Ganga at this phase.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by ramana »

Hindu Newpaper:

When Fakirs held sway
IT IS a strange fact of history that most of the Muslim rulers of Delhiwere all dependent for the success of their reigns on Sufis like Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti, Khwaja Qutbudin Bakhtiar Kaki, Baba Farid, Hazrat Nizamuddin Aulia and Sheikh Nasiruddin Mahmud. It is because of this that Delhi is known as the threshold of 22 khwajas or saints, all of them were venerated by Ahmed Shah.

This fact has been recognised by no less a researcher than Richard M. Eaton, who teaches South Asian History in Arizona, USA. His books include Sufis in Medieval India, Essays on Islam and Indian History, The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier and The Sufis of Bijapur.In his chapter of Sufism and State Building, included in Muslim States in Medieval India Eaton quotes Abd dal-Malik Isami, the Bahamani court poet in 1350 as saying:

"In every country there is a man of piety who keeps it going and well. Although there might be a monarch in every country, yet it is actually under the protection of a fakir (sufi saint)."


Fourteen rulers of Bengal were devotees of Sheikh Ala al-Haq, who died in 1398 and whose mentor had been a disciple of Hazrat Nizamuddin.It was Moinuddin Chishti who patronised Mohammad Ghori, whose successor Qutbuddin was a mureed of Khwaja Qutubuddin Bakhtiar Kaki, after whom he named the Qutub Minar. Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya was the spiritual guide of Mohammad bin Tughlak. Firoz Tughlak was a devotee of Nasiruddin Mahmud. Even the Moghuls believed they derived their power and authority from the sufis of India. Babar paid homage at the shrine of Nizamuddin Auliya after his capture of Delhi and his brother-in-law, repaired the shrine of the saint.

Akbar built his father, Humayun's Tomb in Nizamuddin and made pilgrimages to the dargah in Ajmer on foot. His devotion to Sheikh Salim Chishti is well known. Jahangir, Shah Jahan, Aurangzeb and the latter Moghuls like Ahmad Shah (1748-54) carried on this tradition right up to the time of Bahadur Shah Zafar (1837-58), who built his mahal opposite the shrine of Qutbuddin Bakhtiar Kaki. Many emperors are buried near Qutubddin's Dargah and in Humayun's Tomb, in the vicinity of Nizamuddin Auliya's shrine. So also at Fatehpur Sikri, a whole city founded by Akbar in honour of Sheikh Salim Chishti, through whose prayers Jahangir was born.

Eaton quotes Isami as saying, "The decline of Delhi and Tughlak Empire, generally, had resulted in large part from the demise in 1325 of Sheikh Nizamuddin Auliya. Conversely he (Isami) considered that the arrival in the Deccan of one of Nizamuddin Auliya's leading spiritual successors, Burhan al-Din Gharib was the cause of that region's flourishing state at mid-14th Century.

Sufi saves

According to Isami, the Delhi Sultanate was saved from a Mongol invasion in the 14th Century because of the respect shown by Mohammad bin Tughlak to the shrine of Moinuddin Chishti. Earlier, Delhi escaped the invasion of Chinghez Khan during the reign of Altamash in 1221 due to the devotion of the Sultan to Qutbuddin Bakhtiar Kaki. Jahanara Begum, Shah Jahan's daughter, wrote a biography of the Ajmer Khwaja (Moinuddin Chishti).

Eaton quotes Syed Liaqat Hussin Moni to show that the Moghul courtly culture still prevails at the shrines of the Chishtis: "It has been noted recently that the qawwali protocols observed during the annual urs ceremonies at Ajmer, betray the impact of Moghul court etiquette. The Diwan, dressed in Moghul fashion, represents in fact the Moghul king rather than a religious dignitary, and comes escorted by the torchbearers and mace-bearers wearing Moghul costumes. He takes his seat on the cushion (gadela) under a special tent (dalbadal) erected for the occasion. On his arrival in the shrine the Diwan kisses the tomb and offers flowers, and then one of the khadims, who happens to be his wakil, like the other pilgrims, ties a dastar (turban) over his head, spreads the cloth sheet over his bowed head prays for him, and then gives him taburruk, consisting of flowers, sandal and sweets. Then he (the Diwan) sits down and the fatiha khwans, who are permanently and hereditarily employed, recite the fatiha, as well as prayers for the sovereign (badsha-I-Islam), the diwan, the mutawalli and other officials, and for the general public."

The Ajmer urs that concluded recently witnessed these ceremonies, some of which are repeated at the annual pilgrimage to the shrines of Qutuuddin Bakhtiar Kaki and Nizamuddin Auliya in Delhi. So the link between medieval rulers and saints continues unbroken, notwithstanding the locked door that greeted Balban when he went to placate a sufi who had been insulted by his grandson, Kaikobad.
Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Vikas »

Ramana ji, Would this article be construed as promoting superstition as per new MH Law ?
After all believing in dead men helping a ruler is hog wash and humbug no..

On later thought, Most of these sufis must be treated at par with Aurangzeb and Mohd Gori as far as Indic civilization is concerned.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Singha »

the Khaljis (alauddin) managed to militarily defeat several mongol incursions , so I dont know how far sufi hocus pocus had anything to do with it.
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Virendra »

Celebrating the Sufis is just a soft power advertisement of Islam. How effective conversion machines the Sufis (backed by State) were, can be gauged by looking at the huge Hindu populations at their locations.
They might have caused some conversions on few occasions but more than that, the people just had respect for them and listened to their message. That's all.
Wars are won by soldiers, Kingdoms are kept by boots on ground and a well oiled state machinery. Sufis hardly had anything to do with it.
A reason why the muslim Kings respected these guys is - that not only it kept them in good books of the muslims of their sultanates, but also helped them connect to the Hindu masses that kept these Sufis in high regard.

Turks and Mughals were outsiders. Even after winning battles, minimum public co-operation on daily basis was yet to be achieved. They knew that this was important to survive in the agriculture driven country.

Regards,
Virendra
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Virendra »

Singha wrote:the Khaljis (alauddin) managed to militarily defeat several mongol incursions , so I dont know how far sufi hocus pocus had anything to do with it.
I consider the Mongol incursions as a very negative turning point for Indics.
The huge ranks of Turks who were displaced from Central Asia and Eurasia by the Mongol raids, poured into north India.
This at a time when Turkish sultanates here were having one on one clashes with local Kingdoms in a close fight.
This event tipped the balance off in favor of Turks. They would've been written off from here much early otherwise.

Regards,
Virendra
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Singha »

true. pretty much all their court nobles and generals were of imported persian/CAR stock. so were the core of their standing armies. each 'warlord' had perhaps 1000-10k of these professional soldiers and were given a jagir to rule in areas like haryana, rohilkhand, western UP.....within a few days march of delhi if the order came to mass for a campaign. then came co-opted hindu elements like the kachwaha clan of jaipur and amber.

it was when powerful chieftains were deputed to far off places like hyderabad , with their own logistical routes (sea) and hinterland when they found it easy to break away and start their own rule (deccan sultanates)
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Singha »

^ wrt mongols, its a mixed bag. we certainly avoid the wholesale looting and massacre that the persians and turks had to absorb. if the turks / persians hadnt been there as a shock absorber the khan would have driven straight for north india , looted it and perhaps one of his sons started his own shop later. without lakhs of horses or mountainous territory to ambush them I dont see how a infantry heavy NI coalition army could take on a mongol horde in plains warfare.
right upto the edges of the grasslands in eastern europe the mongols rampaged...it was only in the hills of hungary/austria etc where the could no longer be so mobile and ran out of ideas and interest.
Last edited by Singha on 27 Aug 2013 09:51, edited 1 time in total.
Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Vikas »

Sufis were the ones who put gold plating on the kabad ideology to make it look attractive till this date while being in hand in glove with rulers from Arab/Turk/Persia and later Delhi..
Atri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4152
Joined: 01 Feb 2009 21:07

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Atri »

Singha wrote:^ wrt mongols, its a mixed bag. we certainly avoid the wholesale looting and massacre that the persians and turks had to absorb. if the turks / persians hadnt been there as a shock absorber the khan would have driven straight for north india , looted it and perhaps one of his sons started his own shop later. without lakhs of horses or mountainous territory to ambush them I dont see how a infantry heavy NI coalition army could take on a mongol horde in plains warfare.
right upto the edges of the grasslands in eastern europe the mongols rampaged...it was only in the hills of hungary/austria etc where the could no longer be so mobile and ran out of ideas and interest.
Longbowmen formations perhaps??? Indian longbows wwre very effectively used in defensive warfare by guptas in their central Asian conquest.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Singha »

the mongols had the composite bow and knew how to fire volleys on the move before swiftly retreating. for longbows to be effective you need them funneled into valleys or with marshes on the side and preferably riding uphill, and with your bowmen protected by a solid wall of pikes and obstacles, with cavalry support on the sides and back to beat back outflankers.
atleast thats what my reading of anglo-french wars says.

but superior mobility of mongols would surely allow them to outflank, attack our supply chain, attack at many points, stage night ambushes and be uncatchable in retreat even if defeated.

we needed to get them into hills of central india and SW Rajasthan to take a good bite from them. plus let the monsoon and disease sicken their horses and men.
Last edited by Singha on 27 Aug 2013 14:37, edited 1 time in total.
member_20292
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2059
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by member_20292 »

Singha wrote:^ wrt mongols, its a mixed bag. we certainly avoid the wholesale looting and massacre that the persians and turks had to absorb. if the turks / persians hadnt been there as a shock absorber the khan would have driven straight for north india , looted it and perhaps one of his sons started his own shop later. without lakhs of horses or mountainous territory to ambush them I dont see how a infantry heavy NI coalition army could take on a mongol horde in plains warfare.
right upto the edges of the grasslands in eastern europe the mongols rampaged...it was only in the hills of hungary/austria etc where the could no longer be so mobile and ran out of ideas and interest.
northern India actually extends up to Afghanistan. The mongols were, in fact, fought and beaten by the NI kings, just like Alexander earlier.
They were DEFLECTED into Iran, whose population was reduced by 75% due to the Mongols.

Our tradition of shruti, i.e oral and not written history does not serve us well sometimes.
Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6470
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Supratik »

The book and sword moved hand in hand onto occupied territories. The Sufis were to Muslim imperialists what the missionary was to Christian imperialists. A lot of Hindu castes and tribes in NW India, NI and the Bengal delta got converted by the Sufis.
Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10388
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Yagnasri »

Did Shah Jahan did during "doing things' in harem??? I read that he was active till the death. Any gurus????
SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5777
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by SBajwa »

The book and sword moved hand in hand onto occupied territories. The Sufis were to Muslim imperialists what the missionary was to Christian imperialists. A lot of Hindu castes and tribes in NW India, NI and the Bengal delta got converted by the Sufis.
and these sufis used Indian ways like singing Qawallis (like Bhajans), Gullible simpleton folks were lured by superstition (tie this charm here, visit that Dargah every Tuesday, etc)., and so forth. They simple got the Islam towards lower strata of Dharmic people and confused them towards "Sarv Dharam Sambhav".
Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Vikas »

Even today, you can see folks thronging the Mazars and Peer Baba while we have no Indic tradition of praying at the tomb or maintaining dead mans burial ground.
Last edited by Vikas on 28 Aug 2013 09:21, edited 1 time in total.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by brihaspati »

Singha wrote:the Khaljis (alauddin) managed to militarily defeat several mongol incursions , so I dont know how far sufi hocus pocus had anything to do with it.
It is claimed so by pro-Sultanate islamic narrators. Problem about Alauddin's defeat of Mongols is that there is no corroboration. On at least one occasion - crucially - the Mongols either actually sacked or came very close to Delhi. Apparently Alauddin was out fighting them elsewhere - but we have no fixed location of his engagements at that time point. My suspicion is that he had fled. This fleeing must have been happening often as the Mongol presence in AFPak seems to have been quite extended during Alauddin's reign.

One clue could have been Alauddin's "gracious" and "merciful" allowance/permission for a large population of Mongols to settle in the Doab. Now I had always wondered as to why one of the most fertile areas were left to Mongols - especially when the Mongols at that period were not known for settling down. More likely that Alauddin bought them off - or came to terms with them for peace in return for giving them possession of fertile and irrigated land. When the main military presence to the west - of the Mongols finally removed because the khanates of Central Asia got entangled in their own regional contests and the mongols on field this far south were drawn into the northern battles - Alauddin knew that now the western Mongol armies would not be there to retaliate and massacred the Doab Mongols.

It is quite possible that Alauddin actually lost seriously and severely to the Mongols. Typically, the Islamist narrators remain silent on the defeats of those they identify with. Typically this appears as long periods of silence on wars and victories. Or avoidance of mention of certain regions and places etc. Or vague and hazy descriptions of campaigns.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by brihaspati »

We can blame the Mongols. But the Mongols originally came chasing their western invaders - first the Arabs defeated large parts of Persians [not entirely - many places remained non-Muslim until early 16th century - including Geelan, supposed roots of Geelani, both the full Paki and the semi Pakis.] Then they used enslaved and converted Persians to swell their army to conquer the western Turks. These Turks, together with eastern Turks, Tibetans and for some time the Tang Chinese - carried on a running war with the Caliphate then based in Gulf.

The Turks were then mostly followers of Indic faiths adapted to their own traditions. But with the typical problems inherent in more refined/liberal theologies their societies split too - and opportunists, especially, from sibling rivalry among elite brothers gradually converted to use the Ummayad and Abbasid military financial support for their own personal ambitions. Once the western Turks fell to Islam they in turn were used or joined in the conquest/jihad programme - and attacked the eastern Turks in a pincer with possible collaboration with a portion of Tang. Eastern Turks fell and joined in turn against the Mongols - who were definitely vehemently anti-Muslim at this stage. The western Mongols fell before the eastern - and the eastern Mongols - fought the longest and the hardest - against a tri-partite coalition of western Muslims, Chinese and sometimes Tibetans [and possibly a few Kashmiri p-sec kings].

The Turks who extended into AFG also fought hard - and the Turki shahis did defend Indic religions for a long time in the south west while the eastern Mongols were doing virtually the same in and around current Mongolia. When the Mongols organized and swept back towards west - they began driving the Turks, Persians out.

Ultimately it was the Arab - and the Caliphate at Kufa and Baghdad - that was responsible for thsi whole chain of events. The first Mongol raids in sultanate times were parts of a general sweep of vengeance and retribution of the type of Hulaku against Muslims in general and not just any ethnic warfare.
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by brihaspati »

Sufis accompanied jihadi armies - as in Shah jalal of Sylhet/BD and were active Hindu-lady-lifters as well as active participants in battles. If you look at the so-called success stories of sufi saints - they all have their deras near centres of Islmist military power. The Ajmer founder Aulya is a typical example. He went and took up residence in a temple where his followers brought a cow everyday and slaughtered it and feasted on it. The local ruler is said to hav etrembled in his presence. At first the story appears strange since the saint was supposed to be an emissary of peace and love and unarmed. But that his presence was on the strength of Muslim military strength is given out by another story that followed soon after his arrival.

The fact that there was a military unit close by - is shown by the story of his having dreamt, soon after taking residence at Ajmer, one night of being rebuked by Muhammad for not keeping his sunna of "marriage", and that same night the "nearby" Muslim military commander raided a neighbouring hindu raja and "lifted" the raja's daughter and gifted her to the sufi saint the same night.
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Virendra »

Narayana Rao wrote:Did Shah Jahan did during "doing things' in harem??? I read that he was active till the death. Any gurus????
We have a harem account by Gulbadan Begum that is till 2 generations before Shahajahan. But not sure if any authentic account exists for this guy's time.
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Virendra »

brihaspati wrote:
Singha wrote:the Khaljis (alauddin) managed to militarily defeat several mongol incursions , so I dont know how far sufi hocus pocus had anything to do with it.
It is claimed so by pro-Sultanate islamic narrators. Problem about Alauddin's defeat of Mongols is that there is no corroboration. On at least one occasion - crucially - the Mongols either actually sacked or came very close to Delhi. Apparently Alauddin was out fighting them elsewhere - but we have no fixed location of his engagements at that time point. My suspicion is that he had fled. This fleeing must have been happening often as the Mongol presence in AFPak seems to have been quite extended during Alauddin's reign...

...It is quite possible that Alauddin actually lost seriously and severely to the Mongols. Typically, the Islamist narrators remain silent on the defeats of those they identify with. Typically this appears as long periods of silence on wars and victories. Or avoidance of mention of certain regions and places etc. Or vague and hazy descriptions of campaigns.
A surprise attack is not impossible given the agility and speed of Mongols. Couldn've been one or two battles only.
Apart from that Alauddin was not overwhelmed by mongols it seems. Sad that there were no major and contemporary historiography catering the then actions of Mongols.
One can't expect Arab-Turk patronized chroniclers to write liberally on Mongols.
Last edited by Virendra on 28 Aug 2013 12:39, edited 1 time in total.
Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Vikas »

Why were Mughals called as Mughal ? Is this corruption of word Mongol since Babar is said to be related to Mongols from his mothers side.
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Virendra »

VikasRaina wrote:Why were Mughals called as Mughal ? Is this corruption of word Mongol since Babar is said to be related to Mongols from his mothers side.
Yes. When persian chroniclers began writing on the Mongols they encountered, they wrote it as Mughal.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Lalmohan »

the mongols did write extensively about their own histories - as in the "secret history of..." books. but this may have fallen by the wayside. baburnamah and subsequent namahs also follow this tradition
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Virendra »

Lalmohan ji can you provide some primary sources on Mongols?
About Babur etc .. I find it odd how the Afghans etc can worship this guy after he liberally expresses his homosexuality in Baburnamah.
I have nothing against gays and all. But just strange how the orthodox society lapped up this information of Baburnamah.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Lalmohan »

both turkic and afghan societies had similar practices - so nothing strange for them
mongols did not initially, but once they became turkic through 'intermarriage' and muslim, the mughals picked up the same habits
core mongols are not practioners of the one-wing-bird-flight-regime
Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10388
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Yagnasri »

Virendra wrote:
Narayana Rao wrote:Did Shah Jahan did during "doing things' in harem??? I read that he was active till the death. Any gurus????
We have a harem account by Gulbadan Begum that is till 2 generations before Shahajahan. But not sure if any authentic account exists for this guy's time.
I have read rumours about Roshanara. but that is it. Not much other details. I am looking for material on Shah Jahan because of the myth of his "love" for Muntaz is requirse greater examination. After reading Oak I think we need to get some more material on Shah Jahan.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Singha »

actually its the pious seller of prayer caps Aurangzeb who is held in high esteem by modern day ghazis. none of his forefathers command his brand value as a demolisher of temples and viharas and a punisher of kafirs. he spent 27 long years in the deccan, running around on one campaign or another.

more r&d on this 'pious and austere' man is always welcome.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Lalmohan »

shah jehan had multiple wives and a full harem - mumtaz was one of many
brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by brihaspati »

Virendra wrote:
brihaspati wrote:
It is claimed so by pro-Sultanate islamic narrators. Problem about Alauddin's defeat of Mongols is that there is no corroboration. On at least one occasion - crucially - the Mongols either actually sacked or came very close to Delhi. Apparently Alauddin was out fighting them elsewhere - but we have no fixed location of his engagements at that time point. My suspicion is that he had fled. This fleeing must have been happening often as the Mongol presence in AFPak seems to have been quite extended during Alauddin's reign...

...It is quite possible that Alauddin actually lost seriously and severely to the Mongols. Typically, the Islamist narrators remain silent on the defeats of those they identify with. Typically this appears as long periods of silence on wars and victories. Or avoidance of mention of certain regions and places etc. Or vague and hazy descriptions of campaigns.
A surprise attack is not impossible given the agility and speed of Mongols. Couldn've been one or two battles only.
Apart from that Alauddin was not overwhelmed by mongols it seems. Sad that there were no major and contemporary historiography catering the then actions of Mongols.
One can't expect Arab-Turk patronized chroniclers to write liberally on Mongols.
Look at the major historians of Alauddin. There are many gaps in the story of the slayer-of-Mongols mythology. Given Alauddin's genocidal tastes, making an exception for Mongol settlers in the fertile Doab - is even stranger, and completely out of pattern for all his campaigns.

The Mongol armies were present for long - too long in the western sectors to be consistent with - Alauddin being really successful against them.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Singha »

the mongols or to be more accurate the IL-khanate founded by one of chengis sons were eventually defeated by the arabs and turks who had equally good stock of horses and camels, better armour & weapons technology from big cities in the middle east and equal tactics.

so its not that they were invincible.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Lalmohan »

mongols also press ganged the conquered into their armies, which is how the turks learned their tactics, and later the russians
this is how they were able to neutralise their advantages and eventually beat them or absorbed them
in india and china the mongols were absorbed into the 'main stream'
Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1211
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Virendra »

brihaspati wrote:Look at the major historians of Alauddin. There are many gaps in the story of the slayer-of-Mongols mythology. Given Alauddin's genocidal tastes, making an exception for Mongol settlers in the fertile Doab - is even stranger, and completely out of pattern for all his campaigns.

The Mongol armies were present for long - too long in the western sectors to be consistent with - Alauddin being really successful against them.
I will try to see what gaps.
Obviously Alauddin didn't let Mongols settle out of some respect or love for them. He might be trying to avoid a clash with them due to his resources being drained in some other battles/campaigns already or also he might be interested in employing them.
After all Mongols had run haywire after Chengiz. There was neither a proper central leadership nor a grand vision to subscribe to.
Hence what Alauddin did was only a ploy to sheath the Mongol swords rising against the Khiljis.
However, if Mongols had got anything more than one or two battles against the Khiljis, we would be seeing some sort of a treaty or a larger contingent based here. And ofcourse an area much larger than Doab should have been ceded.
I think Alauddin was aware than Mongols were only campaigning and were going to be distracted with other matters pressing urgently. He knew it was just a phase, he bid his time and then chopped off the remnants of the enemy.
Some of the mongol survivors are also known to have taken refuge in the forts of Rajputana. Although I don't know that happened to those guys in the end.

Regards,
Virendra
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Singha »

mongols hordes usually treated back to their core pastoral areas in the winter to pasture their horses, gather fresh animals and rest before summer campaign season.

khaljis I think rounded up all mongols from near delhi(mongolpuri) and put their heads onto a tower in siri fort like hindus put a matrix of diya into alcoves in some walls. he bided his time and struck with no mercy when he saw a chance. I believe the charge was collaborating with other raiding mongols.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: The Mughal Era in India

Post by Lalmohan »

mongols and rajputs fought together against alauddin at ranthambore if i remember correctly
Locked