Princes of the Mughal Empire
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 сер 2024
- Harvard South Asia Institute Muslim Societies in South Asia Seminar
Tuesday, September 25, 2014, Harvard University
Munis Faruqui, Associate Professor, Department of South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of California Berkeley
Chair: Ali Asani, Professor of Indo-Muslim and Islamic Religion and Cultures, Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences; Director, Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Islamic Studies Program
For almost 200 years, the Mughal emperors ruled supreme in northern India. How was it possible that a Muslim, ethnically Turkish, Persian-speaking dynasty established itself in the Indian subcontinent to become one of the largest and most dynamic empires in the early-modern period? Using the figure of the Mughal prince, Munis D. Faruqui offers a new interpretive lens through which to comprehend Mughal state formation. In a challenge to previous scholarship, Prof. Faruqui’s work suggests that far from undermining the foundations of empire, the court intrigues and political backbiting that were features of Mughal political life - and that frequently resulted in rebellions and wars of succession - actually helped spread, deepen, and mobilize Mughal power through an empire-wide network of friends and allies. Ultimately, however, because Mughal imperial and princely success were interlinked when both experienced political stress in the late 1600s and early 1700s, they atrophied together with negative results for the empire.
Read more: southasiainstit...
I'd love to hear him for an hour only on the role of the Rajputs in the Mughal empire.
20th Century is different from Previous Centuries because it taught "Status reversal was eminent for transformation".. Whether it is Islam/Mughals/Hindu Rajas/Queens or Kings, The principle of Hardwork, Skills gives you bread and butter for all the people equally..
Excellent! Shabash! My 2 cents as to why the Mughals declined:
1. All empires decline eventually
2. The Mughals over extended themselves with endless meaningless campaigns in the Deccan...supporting an army of 700,000 year after year decades after decades....even for the richest treasury on earth, impossible.
3. The succession system in the Mughal court was weak, and didn't allow for smooth transfer of power. Some of these princely struggles of accession were pretty destructive.......its wasn't like the old Hindu Maharajahs engaging each other in battle with specific rules...BUT gunpowder armies wreaking havoc on vast swathes of the country. There is nothing good about such as system, contrary to the Professors views......about producing uber hardened new leaders.
4. Nader Shah's invasion of India 1739...and the sacking of Delhi.
5. The Maratha's success in the battle field just as the Mughals weakness multiplied in the COURT in Delhi and in the battle field....Bhajirao, Scindia etc
But you see Ottomans did much better. And they had a larger land area. And they took close to eight hundred years to extinguish ;)
Great lecture. Thanks for the upload
I Am Belonging Mughals..... and proud to be it......
sjith9 haha
Shenshah Salman Mirza Saheb Hahaha.
@@omarabdullah5690 bro we are not belongs to family of shahnshah but we are belongs to mughals when mughals comes to india they are comes with so big military and peoples that's why we are among thos just read history
@@salmanmirza9918as far as I know they come with the army of men. They marry or take concubines from indigenous hindu indian women.
That was great! Really interesting explanation of the empire. And thank you for challenging the conventional naysaying about Aurangzeb.
I think Aurangzeb was after Akbar the most capable Mughal emperor. But unfortunately for them he was an idealist like Hitler or Mao, and for the way system was set up in India with its huge diversity, his policies on Deccan Jihad weren't very sound, but of coarse we are all wiser after the event. Even he died knowing this. What the empire needed was reforms, political, military and administrative reforms. Instead Aurangzeb spent that time fighting.
Khurmiful ... sounds very true. Fighting in the Deccan, fighting Hindus in the Deccan, the Desh, the Ghats, the Konkan, the Deep South ... instead of fighting the English out of Bombay and Bengal. It could still have been done in Aurangzeb's time, with a mere shift in the policy of the Peacock Throne. Imagine the implications.
Ganduudin aurangzeb was a lullikhor just like nabi tattiikhor muh meh dedo gaand bhi lelo muhammad
There is the conventional narrative about Aurangzeb for a reason. Why don't you glorify the Muslims who fought the crusade wars against Christians. You do that, vilify the Christians for fighting the war.
Mughal rule was futile and waste of time which almost destroyed indias culture, knowledge system, universities with so much effort on hindu destruction and conversion.
* not one university set up whereas Europe was awakening
* barbarism was sanctified
* succession was always barbaric and brutal
* aurangzeb not only killed his own real 3 brothers imprisoned his father and sent to him severed head of his son and own brother as gift
* My personal opinion is that such emperors are not worth calling a human. Only Islam can produce such inhumans.
* such deeds were regular occurrence during mughals period or during any muslim rule.
* every 2 to 4 years there was regular change of ruler even during saltenet time. Average life span of sultans was 3 to 4 years.
* highest level of barbarism in destroying hindu temples, burning of universities.
Two issues:
1. None of the Moghul sisters married! They were not wives.
2. He glossed over Aurangzeb's bigotry and Hindu rebellion in the Deccan. ISIS and Aurangzeb had similar ideologies.
Not 100% sure but I believe it was only after Akbars reign woman born to an emperor were not allowed to marry
+Pushkar Ranade
Almost everyone with power in the middle ages had ISIS like tendencies
It is safer to say ISIS has a similar methodology of the middle ages
Nafees Ubaidullah Don't flatter yourself. My ancestors reduced the Mughals to a rump state. Aurangzeb died in my neck of the woods.
Nafees Ubaidullah Um, no. Check timeline. Mughals were sorted by 1730 or so... by Marathis
Lol salty much? Why dont you go and present a paper at Harvard? xD
a history question to the people who know. the mughals are they descendants of the Turks?
They are descendants of the mongols The founder of dynasty, Babur was a direct descendant of Asian Mongol conqueror form the Barlas tribe Timur the Great on his father's side and Mongol emperor Genghis Khan on his mother's side as well as Babur's ancestors had also affiliations with Genghisids through marriages and common ancestry.[2] The term "Mughal" is itself corrupted form of "Mongol" in Arabic and Persian languages, as it emphasised the Mongol origins of the Mughal dynasty.[3]
Girl in the background is hot !!! Good on you girl !
+Abid Rehman lower your gaze...
insanely hot ! damn
52
mughals created a state of people comprising of different ethnicities and creeds...they are also known for building a secular state and a state having efficient administration and well planned agrarian society...
Muslim period was the worst period of human history and history of india where Ram Rajya is ideal kingdom.
Akbar the great the best ruler of Mughal was half Iranian origin
Mugal empir destroy Yahjooj mahjooj
Modernn world end 2030 next new kilafath empir comming .wait
Sale chutiya
Madarchod allah
Good riddance, the Mughal caliphate was a horrifically shitty empire, glad they fell to the Hindu Maratha confederacy and the Sikh confederacy (later becoming the Sikh empire), I'm just sick of the romanticisation of this empire, seems the experts haven't even fully studied it.
+Bruce Wayne Absolutely!
Nafees Ubaidullah It was 50/60% of world GDP under the Maurya/Gupta Empires, the GDP dropped by over 20/30% because the Mughals (it actually is supposed to be Mongol, but the "ung" vowel or matra was removed when an Indian spy reported of them), kept fighting wars and violently converting everyone to Islam in a far more brutal manner than ISIS is doing to the Yazidis.
Yes I know lol, doesn't change the fact they were islamofascists, and I got the 50% stat from tableau publci database of global share of GDP.
It is thought that India would have half of world trade because it had a series of major scientific revolutions when the rest of the world had not as many, the hexadecimal numeral system, (not just the number 0, but 1 to 10) for trade, Pythagoras before Pythagoras or the Egyptians before him had discovered it, the cottongen, or Sushruta's surgerical techniques, honestly though, I don't care about India's past GDP figures, it is history, what I care about is the denial of the truth.
Of all the people you quoted, you quoted Aurengzeb, from what I've studied of him, that man was a dufus, and it is good that the old fuck grew old enough to see his Caliphate turn to a very weak and declining state, after all he caused it all.
Nafees Ubaidullah You do realise that the Roman Empire was less than 4% of global GDP? And the Sassanid Empire was less than 0.5% of global GDP... learn the figures, Europe and Persia were tiny back then.
Persia underwent a mass religious cleansing after the Battle of al-Qadasiyyah, where the Rashidun Caliphate (sons of Muhammad) pillaged Persia, forcefully converted everyone to Islam (rape of women, enslavement of children, massacres of men) and so forth, and that's where you come from (or the later expansions into India/Indonesia, I'm just guessing from your name).
I'm actually a historian not particularly expert on India, but very knowledgeable on Islam, and if you think the criticism of Islam is grown out of hatred rather than rationalism, you know little of your own religion.
Islamic invaders had a very cruel way of massacring civilians and forced conversion. The reason India is Hindu majority even after such large period on invasion by Islamic invaders is resistance of Hindus. Vijaynagar empire, Marathas, Sikhs, Ahoms etc actively resisted the Mughals. Chatrapati Shivaji founded the Maratha empire and this was the starting of Mughals decline. Marathas expende their empire and gave protection to Hindus. The present Muslim population of India is due to forced conversion.