"What did the Mughals do for us ?" British Library : The Mughal Empire in pictures

s28

ODI Debutant
Joined
Nov 1, 2011
Runs
9,388
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/9646841/What-did-the-Mughals-do-for-us.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...91/The-British-Library-The-Mughal-Empire.html

In the summer of 1617, Emperor Jahangir — decked out in the finest silks and “rubies as great as walnuts” – marked his 48th birthday with a stunning ceremony in the palace gardens at Agra. “Here attended all the nobility, sitting about on carpets, until the King came” to be weighed on a huge set of golden scales.

The ritual is reported by enthralled onlooker Sir Thomas Roe, the British ambassador, in his Journal of the Mission to the Mughal Empire. Jahangir was weighed against bags of silver, gold and jewels, with the equivalent of his weight then distributed to the poor. Here was an emperor literally worth his weight in gold; or, as Roe put it, “the treasury of all the world”.

The ambassadorial view of the Mughals has persisted down the centuries. The dynasty – which ruled most of Asia’s subcontinent between 1526 and the early 19th century – has traditionally been seen as one of sensualist extravagance. Particularly in Britain, where historians have played up the administrative achievements in India of the Raj years (roads, railways, schools) in contrast to the hookahs and harems of the preceding Mughal age.

A new exhibition at the British Library, though, plans to set the record straight; to reconsider the Mughal Empire as one of the most progressive in history. We know about the architecture, of course: most famously, the Taj Mahal, Emperor Shah Jahan’s love poem in stone for his late wife Mumtaz, and the other garden tombs built to anticipate and replicate paradise.

Yet, of perhaps greater relevance is the multicultural society the Mughals created avant la lettre. A Turkic-Mongol race, hailing from central Asia, the Mughals were invading Muslims who came to control a mostly Hindu population. Their religious tolerance manifested itself in various ways – especially under the third ruler Akbar (1556-1605), who would surely figure in any “Greatest Emperors of all Time” list.


The tax burden on non-Muslims was eased; the authority of regional Hindu rulers was left intact; and forcible conversion to Islam was outlawed. Akbar also took Hindu wives, as well as introducing the legendary Ibadat Khana (House of Worship), where people of all faiths (Islamic, Hindu, Jain, Sikh, Christian, atheist, even chilli worshippers) were encouraged to debate on matters religious and philosophical.

The good times didn’t last, however, and the reign of the militantly orthodox Aurangzeb began the Mughals’ steady decline – his death in 1707 heralding deadly squabbles for the throne that saw rivals blinded with hot needles and forced off cliffs on their elephants.

Artistic activity followed a similar pattern of rise and fall. Founded in the 1550s, the Mughal painting school comprised of Indian artists, taught by Persian masters and influenced by Renaissance prints arriving as gifts to the emperor from European envoys and missionaries.

A sophisticated stylistic fusion resulted, visible in the many illustrated manuscripts and miniatures on show at the British Library. It’s fascinating to see Mughal artists embracing – and, in many cases, mastering – an array of naturalistic techniques from the West (perspective, spatial depth, figural modelling) while never losing the local fondness for sheer vibrancy of colour.
 
The best thing they did was invent the Hookah out which we now have the Shisha :bow:
hs.gif
 
Saw a programme by Andrew Marr who said that the last Mughal Emperor murdered his brother and nephew, adopted a fundamentalist style religion, banned music and learning, throttled trade, and exhausted the Empire so that the British were able to conquer India with ease.

This seems a trend throughout history: enlightened ideas give us good government, science and art for a while, then a military hardman takes over and that society collapses.
 
Yes thank God for the British.

Who'd have thought that within a few centuries of Britains 'conquest' of India there would be several million British Muslims or that whole British towns would be under Shariah law :p
 
Saw a programme by Andrew Marr who said that the last Mughal Emperor murdered his brother and nephew, adopted a fundamentalist style religion, banned music and learning, throttled trade, and exhausted the Empire so that the British were able to conquer India with ease.

This seems a trend throughout history: enlightened ideas give us good government, science and art for a while, then a military hardman takes over and that society collapses.

Wrong, the last Mughal emperor was exiled to the Islands of Andaman and imprisoned by the British there until his death, while there, the heads of his two sons were presented to him as gifts by the British after they were executed...

The British were able to conquer India not because of what that "supposed last" emperor of India did, but because of extravagance and decadence as well as naivete of his successors, namely Jehangir, who gave British East India Company many concessions, allowing them to engage in their intrinsic Albion perfidy...

The Mughal empire had fractured into various weak principalities by the time the British East India company established a foot hold in India...and then following their treacherous divide and rule modus operandi they conquered one principalities after another and eventually took over India...
 
Wrong, the last Mughal emperor was exiled to the Islands of Andaman and imprisoned by the British there until his death, while there, the heads of his two sons were presented to him as gifts by the British after they were executed...

The British were able to conquer India not because of what that "supposed last" emperor of India did, but because of extravagance and decadence as well as naivete of his successors, namely Jehangir, who gave British East India Company many concessions, allowing them to engage in their intrinsic Albion perfidy...

The Mughal empire had fractured into various weak principalities by the time the British East India company established a foot hold in India...and then following their treacherous divide and rule modus operandi they conquered one principalities after another and eventually took over India...

I think the last emporer was exiled to Burma ( Myanmar ) , not Andaman .
 
I think the last emporer was exiled to Burma ( Myanmar ) , not Andaman .

You might be correct about Rangoon being the location, I will have to check...

Either way, the last Mughal emperor was Bahadur Shah Zafar who was indeed exiled following the 1857 war of independence and not Aurangzeb who reigned some 150 years before, as implied by the poster above...
 
Agree with Zarrar , you are probably mixing him up with someone else .

300px-Bahadur_Shah_Zafar.jpg


And i think these were the 2 sons
sons_of_bahadur_shah_zafar.jpg
 
Saw a programme by Andrew Marr who said that the last Mughal Emperor murdered his brother and nephew, adopted a fundamentalist style religion, banned music and learning, throttled trade, and exhausted the Empire so that the British were able to conquer India with ease.

This seems a trend throughout history: enlightened ideas give us good government, science and art for a while, then a military hardman takes over and that society collapses.

Re: Last Mughal King/emperor
He (Aurengzeb) was the last important mughal emperor of india.
By the time of his death, state was nearly bank corrupt (his father Shah Jehan, who was the richest man on earth during his time, also contributed towards this financial crisis i.e. Taj Mehal)
After Aurengzeb, his 16/17 sons fought eachother for throne, so basically for all practical purposes Mughal Empire was done with the death of Aurengzeb (it shrunk in scale from Sub-Continent+ to a city, delhi, in less than 100 years time)

Re: Killing Brothers/Nephew
Nothing new, it was common for mughals (Only Humayoon was kind toward his brother Kamran), Jehangir tried to revolt his dad Akbar...

Re: Social welfare
During Mughal empire, only few were rich and rest (99.99999%) were extremely poor.
Mughal never paid any attention to science and technology and if we compare to Europe, India was extremely backward. (and this was the case for all: secular akbar, secular/religious/secular jehangir, corrupt Shah Jehan and fanatically religious Auregzeb)




interestingly, for a brief period of time, India had a rule, Sher shah suri (afghan who defeated Mughal Humayoon), he was visionary and had the ability to create the history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sher_Shah_Suri
 
Sometimes the ignorance of people on this forum especially regarding Islam from the Pakistani/Muslim posters really shocks me

There are several factors that lead to the destruction of the Mughals here are a list of some of the important one

1st and most important is the Shariah of Allah this governs all beings in the universe and there is no change to this law. The law that applies to Empires is this all empires begin from a minority or weak people who stand for the truth and Allah aids them with victory and victory these original people are often noble in character but would be classed as barbarians. Slowly over the generations as the Empire expands the people become more corrupt wicked and decadent and eventually this empire is destroyed and replaced by a new people restarting the cycle This is Allah's law for all a prime example of this law is Rome and how it started with men so noble that a simple farmer was made king of Rome when Romes was in its early stage and about to be wiped out He was made Dictator of Rome this Man lead them to victory and the People wished to make him Emperor he however said it was his duty to defend his people and now that there was no threat He simply went back to his Farm compare this with the likes of Claudius and Nero.

The mughals and muslims suffered from the same problem Babur was a chieftains son who was raised in simple and hard conditions but as the Mughal empire expanded the rulers became decadent to the point the last mughal emperors were all opium addicts barely able to leave their beds let alone fight to regain their empire. Imagine if this is the state of the Emperors and nobility what would be the state of the ordinary people?

2ndly whenever the mughals are mentioned All of them are portrayed as super liberals apart from Aurangzeb who is meant to be the first islamic exterimist or dictator. Thats a utter load of BS Aurangzeb made only one mistake something other empires did before and after He tried to unite all the subcontinent under Mughal rule which lead to the break down of his empire after him had he tried to create a union with the Mughal state being the strongest member i.e. like NATO today maybe the out come would be diffferent
As for religious policies a recent study by a hindu indian historian showed many temples in India today were built under Aurenzeb's rule that although he was a pious muslim he never forced others to become Muslim. All the negative stuff against him is due to British propaganda as Aurangzeb was the only Mughal ruler to attack the British East Indian company and see it for a threat and actually beat the british in several engagments but it was near the end of his reign when he did this so it became a case of too little too late

Thridly- The mughal empire broke down because the Emperors after Auragzeb were very weak and pleasure seeking self indulgent spoilt brats who were surrounded by greedy incompetent and selfish nobles much the way India Pakistan and Bangladesh have weak incompetent and corrupt governments whilst the chief opponents were the British who are in truth ruthless in achieving objectives, extremely united in pursuing their interests and a very energetic race who will always try to make the best of the situation. This point links back to the first because even the British Empire has been subject to Allah's law initially the British were unified on a handful of principals and firm adherents of Christianity however as their morality decayed their empire has reached to the point Britain is now labelled as the sick man of europe. ( It is still a empire as Britain still holds colonies such as the Caimen islands a place where people store billions of dollars to avoid taxes)
 
Last edited:
Sometimes the ignorance of people on this forum especially regarding Islam from the Pakistani/Muslim posters really shocks me

There are several factors that lead to the destruction of the Mughals here are a list of some of the important one

1st and most important is the Shariah of Allah this governs all beings in the universe and there is no change to this law. The law that applies to Empires is this all empires begin from a minority or weak people who stand for the truth and Allah aids them with victory and victory these original people are often noble in character but would be classed as barbarians. Slowly over the generations as the Empire expands the people become more corrupt wicked and decadent and eventually this empire is destroyed and replaced by a new people restarting the cycle This is Allah's law for all a prime example of this law is Rome and how it started with men so noble that a simple farmer was made king of Rome when Romes was in its early stage and about to be wiped out He was made Dictator of Rome this Man lead them to victory and the People wished to make him Emperor he however said it was his duty to defend his people and now that there was no threat He simply went back to his Farm compare this with the likes of Claudius and Nero.

The mughals and muslims suffered from the same problem Babur was a chieftains son who was raised in simple and hard conditions but as the Mughal empire expanded the rulers became decadent to the point the last mughal emperors were all opium addicts barely able to leave their beds let alone fight to regain their empire. Imagine if this is the state of the Emperors and nobility what would be the state of the ordinary people?

2ndly whenever the mughals are mentioned All of them are portrayed as super liberals apart from Aurangzeb who is meant to be the first islamic exterimist or dictator. Thats a utter load of BS Aurangzeb made only one mistake something other empires did before and after He tried to unite all the subcontinent under Mughal rule which lead to the break down of his empire after him had he tried to create a union with the Mughal state being the strongest member i.e. like NATO today maybe the out come would be diffferent
As for religious policies a recent study by a hindu indian historian showed many temples in India today were built under Aurenzeb's rule that although he was a pious muslim he never forced others to become Muslim. All the negative stuff against him is due to British propaganda as Aurangzeb was the only Mughal ruler to attack the British East Indian company and see it for a threat and actually beat the british in several engagments but it was near the end of his reign when he did this so it became a case of too little too late

Thridly- The mughal empire broke down because the Emperors after Auragzeb were very weak and pleasure seeking self indulgent spoilt brats who were surrounded by greedy incompetent and selfish nobles much the way India Pakistan and Bangladesh have weak incompetent and corrupt governments whilst the chief opponents were the British who are in truth ruthless in achieving objectives, extremely united in pursuing their interests and a very energetic race who will always try to make the best of the situation. This point links back to the first because even the British Empire has been subject to Allah's law initially the British were unified on a handful of principals and firm adherents of Christianity however as their morality decayed their empire has reached to the point Britain is now labelled as the sick man of europe. ( It is still a empire as Britain still holds colonies such as the Caimen islands a place where people store billions of dollars to avoid taxes)

Excellent self-assessment

More "BS" about Aurengzeb

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showpost.php?p=5134384&postcount=405

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/showpost.php?p=5137398&postcount=466
 
Re: Last Mughal King/emperor
He (Aurengzeb) was the last important mughal emperor of india.
By the time of his death, state was nearly bank corrupt (his father Shah Jehan, who was the richest man on earth during his time, also contributed towards this financial crisis i.e. Taj Mehal)
After Aurengzeb, his 16/17 sons fought eachother for throne, so basically for all practical purposes Mughal Empire was done with the death of Aurengzeb (it shrunk in scale from Sub-Continent+ to a city, delhi, in less than 100 years time)

Re: Killing Brothers/Nephew
Nothing new, it was common for mughals (Only Humayoon was kind toward his brother Kamran), Jehangir tried to revolt his dad Akbar...

Re: Social welfare
During Mughal empire, only few were rich and rest (99.99999%) were extremely poor.
Mughal never paid any attention to science and technology and if we compare to Europe, India was extremely backward. (and this was the case for all: secular akbar, secular/religious/secular jehangir, corrupt Shah Jehan and fanatically religious Auregzeb)




interestingly, for a brief period of time, India had a rule, Sher shah suri (afghan who defeated Mughal Humayoon), he was visionary and had the ability to create the history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sher_Shah_Suri

Please enlighten us to the qualities of this visionary so we can judge his merits alongside those who you scorned.
 
Please enlighten us to the qualities of this visionary so we can judge his merits alongside those who you scorned.

I can scan pages for you if you are serious. (reminder: Scanning book pages is a boring task)
Let me know.
 
I can scan pages for you if you are serious. (reminder: Scanning book pages is a boring task)
Let me know.

Why don't you just tell us? Why would I want to look at scanned pages in this day and age where everything can be manipulated? I'm sure whatever you profess can be verified by periodical architecture, historical relevance and common sense.
 
Why don't you just tell us? Why would I want to look at scanned pages in this day and age where everything can be manipulated? I'm sure whatever you profess can be verified by periodical architecture, historical relevance and common sense.

Those are historical books which refer to older historical books of first hand witnesses.



I guess, you better believe me that he was visionary and validate/verified at your end.

good for both of us.
 
It was only for five years before Mughal reconquered it.

sur dynasty
15 years..


Humayoon lost in 1540 to sher Shah

and
Iranian Army won (Humayoon begged to iranian king for help so he was given the Army) against Skindar Suri (if i am correct) in 1555

Sher Shah died in 1545 (so he ruled about 5 years)
 
For those claiming Aurangzeb never forced anyone to convert.

Read up on the history of Guru Tegh Bahadur, the ninth guru of Sikhs. In particular find out how and why he died.
 
sur dynasty
15 years..


Humayoon lost in 1540 to sher Shah

and
Iranian Army won (Humayoon begged to iranian king for help so he was given the Army) against Skindar Suri (if i am correct) in 1555

Sher Shah died in 1545 (so he ruled about 5 years)

That is what i meant in my previous post that Sher Shah ruled five years.
 
In a recent column of Orya Maqbool Jaan about education and science. He also copied the extracts from the books of some historians about the Muslim rule in India. In the column he was taking any sides whether they were good rulers but only explained the work done in the field of education during Muslim rule.

The coulumn is in Urdu and was translated in English

He writes

"I will only present the testimonies of the Western historians, because our greatly learned scholars are allergic to the testimony of any local or Muslim scholar. Will Durant is the most popular historian and philosopher of the Western world. He writes in his book ‘Story of Civilization’ about Mughal India: “There used to be a school master in each village, whose salary was paid by the government. Before the advent of the English, Bengal alone had 80 thousand schools. There used to be a school per every four hundred people. Five subjects were taught in these schools, namely: grammar, arts and crafts, medicine, philosophy and logic.” He wrote in another of his books, ‘A Case for India’, that in the Mughal era, there were one lakh twenty five thousand institutions in Madras alone, where medical sciences were being taught and medical services were provided. Major M. D. Basu has written many books on the British rule and the India before it. Referring Max Muller he writes: “There were 80 thousand schools in Bengal before the English came there.”A tourist named Alexander Hamilton came to India during the rule of Aurangzeb Aalamgeer. He wrote that there were four hundred colleges specializing in the study of arts and sciences in the city of Thatha alone. Major Basu even went on to write that the knowledge of the common Indian in fields of philosophy, logic and science was superior to even that of the elite/Lords of England, including the King and the Queen themselves. James Grant’s report is worth being remembered. He wrote: “Muslims were the first in the world to endow properties for the sake of educational institutions. When the English occupied the whole of India in 1857, five thousand teachers had been receiving their salaries from the government funds in the small district of Rohel Khand alone.” All the above mentioned areas were located in the outskirts, far from the central cities of Delhi, Lahore or Agra. English and Hindu historians agree that the progress in the field of education reached its peak during the rule of Aurangzeb Aalamgeer. For the first time in the history of the subcontinent, he made the salaries of Muslim and Hindu teachers equal, while even a ’secular’ like Akbar had been giving a smaller amount to Hindu teachers. It was Aurangzeb who endowed properties for the first time to religious institutions belonging to all the different beliefs present in India. He arranged for salaries to be paid by the government to the people working in them. Three Hindu historians of that era are very popular, namely Sajan Rai Khatri, Bheem Sen and Eeshwar Das. Sajan Rai Khatri wrote ‘Khulaasat-ut-Tawareekh”, Bheem Sen wrote ‘Nuskha-e-Dilkusha’ while Eeshwar Das wrote ‘Futoohat-e-Aalamgeeri’. These three Hindu scholars agree that for the first time in India, Aalamgeer got a complete study course prepared for the study of medicine, and got books like Tibb-e-Akbar, Mufarrih-ul-Quloob, Tareef-ul-Amraaz, Mujarrabaat-e-Akbari and Tibb-e-Nabawi prepared to be made a part of the curriculum in colleges so that medicine could be taught at a higher level. All these books are of the level of the MBBS curriculum of today. Firoz Shah had established a hospital in Delhi, known as Dar-ush-Shifa, many centuries before Aurangzeb. It was Aurangzeb who got the course book known as Tibb-e-Firoz Shahi prepared to be taught in colleges. During his rule, there were more than a hundred hospitals in Delhi alone."

http://www.pakistankakhudahafiz.com...ant-scholars-of-the-current-era/#.UJ9ZiWeRbm0
 
^true that, I was once searching for the scientists during Mughal period, and I came across pretty sharp scientists, tons of them... I sadly forgot the article and their names, but one in the mid 17th century for instance translated Sir Isaac Newton's works into Farsi (the 'élite' language in Mughal India), which says a lot about the intellectual dynamics there, as that translation came just few decades after the scientist's death... another went to England and wrote treaties on medicine, and was respected by the local British authors...
I also remember reading in some Seyyed Hossein Nasr's book that there were more commentaries on the Persian philosopher Mulla Sadra (the most important Muslim thinker since centuries for some) in India than there were in Persia itself, despite he was a 'star' there! They were all in form of manuscripts, and Hossein Nasr asked : "if a Persian philosopher which wasn't even widely known in India has more than fifty commentators in one library, who knows what kind of philosophers we would find if we study the remaining manuscripts ?"

Not only peoples of the sub-continent, but all colonial societies have been injected an inferiority complex, and it was necessary for imperialistic designs as psychological/intellectual defeat precedes a more practical submission.
 
Also, Abul Hasan Ali Hasani Nadwi's father compiled 8 volumes of scholars/poets/intellectuals/... from the 'Islamic India'... he came across 5000 names, If I correctly remember.
Now, he did it all himself, just think if a 'professional' research institute is being put behind such project how many intellectual gems can be unearth.
 
I concur, Sher shah suri was the best. In his short tenure, he did wonders
 
In a recent column of Orya Maqbool Jaan about education and science. He also copied the extracts from the books of some historians about the Muslim rule in India. In the column he was taking any sides whether they were good rulers but only explained the work done in the field of education during Muslim rule.

The coulumn is in Urdu and was translated in English

He writes

"I will only present the testimonies of the Western historians, because our greatly learned scholars are allergic to the testimony of any local or Muslim scholar. Will Durant is the most popular historian and philosopher of the Western world. He writes in his book ‘Story of Civilization’ about Mughal India: “There used to be a school master in each village, whose salary was paid by the government. Before the advent of the English, Bengal alone had 80 thousand schools. There used to be a school per every four hundred people. Five subjects were taught in these schools, namely: grammar, arts and crafts, medicine, philosophy and logic.” He wrote in another of his books, ‘A Case for India’, that in the Mughal era, there were one lakh twenty five thousand institutions in Madras alone, where medical sciences were being taught and medical services were provided. Major M. D. Basu has written many books on the British rule and the India before it. Referring Max Muller he writes: “There were 80 thousand schools in Bengal before the English came there.”A tourist named Alexander Hamilton came to India during the rule of Aurangzeb Aalamgeer. He wrote that there were four hundred colleges specializing in the study of arts and sciences in the city of Thatha alone. Major Basu even went on to write that the knowledge of the common Indian in fields of philosophy, logic and science was superior to even that of the elite/Lords of England, including the King and the Queen themselves. James Grant’s report is worth being remembered. He wrote: “Muslims were the first in the world to endow properties for the sake of educational institutions. When the English occupied the whole of India in 1857, five thousand teachers had been receiving their salaries from the government funds in the small district of Rohel Khand alone.” All the above mentioned areas were located in the outskirts, far from the central cities of Delhi, Lahore or Agra. English and Hindu historians agree that the progress in the field of education reached its peak during the rule of Aurangzeb Aalamgeer. For the first time in the history of the subcontinent, he made the salaries of Muslim and Hindu teachers equal, while even a ’secular’ like Akbar had been giving a smaller amount to Hindu teachers. It was Aurangzeb who endowed properties for the first time to religious institutions belonging to all the different beliefs present in India. He arranged for salaries to be paid by the government to the people working in them. Three Hindu historians of that era are very popular, namely Sajan Rai Khatri, Bheem Sen and Eeshwar Das. Sajan Rai Khatri wrote ‘Khulaasat-ut-Tawareekh”, Bheem Sen wrote ‘Nuskha-e-Dilkusha’ while Eeshwar Das wrote ‘Futoohat-e-Aalamgeeri’. These three Hindu scholars agree that for the first time in India, Aalamgeer got a complete study course prepared for the study of medicine, and got books like Tibb-e-Akbar, Mufarrih-ul-Quloob, Tareef-ul-Amraaz, Mujarrabaat-e-Akbari and Tibb-e-Nabawi prepared to be made a part of the curriculum in colleges so that medicine could be taught at a higher level. All these books are of the level of the MBBS curriculum of today. Firoz Shah had established a hospital in Delhi, known as Dar-ush-Shifa, many centuries before Aurangzeb. It was Aurangzeb who got the course book known as Tibb-e-Firoz Shahi prepared to be taught in colleges. During his rule, there were more than a hundred hospitals in Delhi alone."

http://www.pakistankakhudahafiz.com...ant-scholars-of-the-current-era/#.UJ9ZiWeRbm0

am I missing thing?

is he implying that scientists taught in those primary schools?

by the way, Firoz Shah was not Mughal ..
 
^true that, I was once searching for the scientists during Mughal period, and I came across pretty sharp scientists, tons of them... I sadly forgot the article and their names, but one in the mid 17th century for instance translated Sir Isaac Newton's works into Farsi (the 'élite' language in Mughal India), which says a lot about the intellectual dynamics there, as that translation came just few decades after the scientist's death... another went to England and wrote treaties on medicine, and was respected by the local British authors...
I also remember reading in some Seyyed Hossein Nasr's book that there were more commentaries on the Persian philosopher Mulla Sadra (the most important Muslim thinker since centuries for some) in India than there were in Persia itself, despite he was a 'star' there! They were all in form of manuscripts, and Hossein Nasr asked : "if a Persian philosopher which wasn't even widely known in India has more than fifty commentators in one library, who knows what kind of philosophers we would find if we study the remaining manuscripts ?"

Not only peoples of the sub-continent, but all colonial societies have been injected an inferiority complex, and it was necessary for imperialistic designs as psychological/intellectual defeat precedes a more practical submission.

sho shaad, Newton was not one of Akbar's Ratans...
1- newton born too late and he would not have understood the farsi anyway.


If you translate some scholarly work, it wont make you a scholar!

as far as I know Mullah sadr was a philosopher and an iranian one...
what to do with Indian Mughals???

I think Mughals invented Haleem"
 
Last edited:
regarding Art:

Emperor Jehangir was the authority in india on paintings...he was very fond of them..
 
am I missing thing?

is he implying that scientists taught in those primary schools?

by the way, Firoz Shah was not Mughal ..

You tell, were there the modern day scientists else where at the time Muslim rule in subcontinent till the time of Aurangzeb.

Einstein, Edison, Graham Bell etc all came later.

At that time there were physicians, astronomers, geographers, mathematicians, physicist etc. The were equally active in sub continent as they were in Ottoman Empire or British Empire etc.

Also as the coloumn writer says

"A person would not find it difficult to understand that the innovative skill required in creating the architectural masterpieces of the Mughal Empire, was not possible without two factors. Firstly, a complete expertise in the art of architecture, which includes sciences dealing with the refining of the minutest details of the basic structures; like geometry, physics and chemistry as well as others. Secondly, a strong economic and financial status of the country; so strong that its rulers could afford the high cost of setting up these great buildings.".

The column tells about the Muslim rule in subcontinent as a whole and it is not focusing on only Mughal rule.
 
Last edited:
You tell, were there the modern day scientists else where at the time Muslim rule in subcontinent till the time of Aurangzeb.

Einstein, Edison, Graham Bell etc all came later.

At that time there were physicians, astronomers, geographers, mathematicians, physicist etc. The were equally active in sub continent as they were in Ottoman Empire or British Empire etc.

Also as the coloumn writer says

"A person would not find it difficult to understand that the innovative skill required in creating the architectural masterpieces of the Mughal Empire, was not possible without two factors. Firstly, a complete expertise in the art of architecture, which includes sciences dealing with the refining of the minutest details of the basic structures; like geometry, physics and chemistry as well as others. Secondly, a strong economic and financial status of the country; so strong that its rulers could afford the high cost of setting up these great buildings.".

The column tells about the Muslim rule in subcontinent as a whole and it is not focusing on only Mughal rule.

I will reply to this later .... in detail..
 
You tell, were there the modern day scientists else where at the time Muslim rule in subcontinent till the time of Aurangzeb.

Einstein, Edison, Graham Bell etc all came later.

At that time there were physicians, astronomers, geographers, mathematicians, physicist etc. The were equally active in sub continent as they were in Ottoman Empire or British Empire etc.

Also as the coloumn writer says

"A person would not find it difficult to understand that the innovative skill required in creating the architectural masterpieces of the Mughal Empire, was not possible without two factors. Firstly, a complete expertise in the art of architecture, which includes sciences dealing with the refining of the minutest details of the basic structures; like geometry, physics and chemistry as well as others. Secondly, a strong economic and financial status of the country; so strong that its rulers could afford the high cost of setting up these great buildings.".

The column tells about the Muslim rule in subcontinent as a whole and it is not focusing on only Mughal rule.


here you go:
(I scanned and then used OCR so their would be few typos)
(I have not underlined/bolded anything and presenting complete chapter to give you an overall picture)

Death of the Future
IN A MERE century and a half, covering just four reigns from Akbar to Aurangzeb, Mughal rule changed the face of India, by which India would recognize itself and the world would recognize India. In every facet of life the Mughal achievement was matchless, and it transformed the lifestyle of the elite throughout India. What the Mughals were, was what the rich and the powerful everywhere in India aspired to be. In customs and manners, dress and cuisine, architecture and gardening, language and literature, art and music and dance, the standards of excellence for a long time thereafter would be Mughalai.
Yet in a fundamental sense India did not change at all. What changed was lifestyle, not life, and that too only of a minuscule elite. There was no transmutation of civilization. Behind the Mughal façade lay the immense body of Hindu culture, ancient and torpid but still breathing. The Hindu world did not change under Muslim influence, nor did the Muslim world change under Hindu influence, despite their 600-odd-year coexistence. There was some interaction between the two cultures, but no synthesis. Nor did either community respond creatively to the stimulus of resurgent Europe, which had reached out across the great oceans and linked up with India even before the Mughals arrived on the scene. There were no stirrings of new life in Mughal India. The Mughal efflorescence was a flowering of the old trees. And it turned out to be the last spring of the old cultures in India.
“IT LOOKS AS if everything in India were being made ready for some remarkable revolution.”-——this was how India at the turn of the seventeenth century seemed to Niccolao Manucci, an astute Italian observer who had lived in India through the entire long reign of Aurangzeb and beyond. India, it appeared to him, was barreling towards chaos.
Outwardly, the Mughal empire still glittered mesmerizingly, but within the golden, jeweled chrysalis, the flesh was rotting, the spirit dead. The land was desolate, the empire crumbling, its economy shattered, its government inefficient and irredeemably corrupt, its mammoth army flaccid and impotent, its culture effete, its people broken and spiritless. Only the Marathas displayed any vitality. But there was no future with the Marathas either. They could have seized the imperial sceptre: it was theirs to take. They had the power. But they had no vision. The Marathas too were captains of the medieval, Hobbesian hell into which India was collapsing in the eighteenth century. India seemed to be a land where the future had died.
This was not how India’s destiny had seemed a century earlier, at the end of Akbar’s reign. Indeed, in many respects the Mughal age was progressive. The Mughals had integrated almost all of India into one empire, and provided it with a fair amount of political stability and administrative unity; under them the Indo-Gangetic Plain, the heartland of India, had for over a century enjoyed such peace as it had not known in a very long time. Culture luxuriated under Mughal patronage, and India now acquired, after the decline of Sanskrit as a living language, a new lingua franca, Urdu. Urbanization had advanced notably under the Mughals, and so had the monetization of the economy, which, along with improvements in the standardization of currency, weights and measures, facilitated the growth of trade. And, coincidentally, new and vital trade linl-cs with Europe had turned the Indian economy, though tentatively, in a new direction.
Yet, despite all this, in several areas crucial to the growth and transformation of society, Mughal India lagged way behind Europe, behind even China, Japan and Persia. There was hardly any vigour in the economy, scant spirit of enterprise among the people. In agriculture, industry and trade, Indian practices were archaic. There was no ferment of ideas, and curiosity about the new science and technology of Europe did not go beyond the dilettantism of a few amirs. Except in a few minor gadgets, India showed little interest in European inventionl.
Even in military technology, so close to the Mughal heart, adoption improvements was slow and haphazard. While numerous European from every stratum of society were arriving in India in Mughal tirnel, only one Indian of note is known to have travelled to Europe—"Hl]l Habibullah, who had visited Europe, . . . had brought with him fin}, goods and fabrics for His Majesty's inspection,” says Nizainuddlny Ahmad, chronicler of Akbar. There were no Indian books on Europe OI‘ European learning. Such indifference was not mere insensitivity to new knowledge, but a denial of the very possibility of change and progress.

Most shocking of all was the debasement of the character of mm; in Mughal India. From the highest amir, indeed from the empe himself, down to the man in the street there was a near total absent of civic morality and personal integrity. “No one ever says a word be relied upon,” writes Manucci. “It is continuously requisite to think the worst and believe the contrary of what is said . . . They deceive both the acute and the careless; thus, when they show themselves the greatest friends, you require to be doubly careful.” Says Roe: "It is not the costome of the best or the worst in this countrey-to be as good as their word, being certaine only in dissembling.” Adds Pelsaert: "Everything in the kingdom is uncertain. Wealth, position, love, friendship, confidence, everything hangs on a thread.” Hypocrisy and sycophancy were the characteristic traits of the Indian ruling class. According to Manucci, Indians seldom spoke openly, but held ”confabulations with nods and metaphors”, which made it easy for them to break faith and still feel decent. The amir probably viewed sycophancy merely as good manners, a formal courtesy, and had therefore no feelings of personal degradation in being a sycophant, especially as the practice was universal. But sycophancy was not just good manners. Lack of earnestness in speech—-using words to dress up and disguise thoughts and feelings, rather than to reveal them——led to lack of earnestness in thought and action, corrupted values, and perverted both individual character and social process. The evil of this was compounded by the peculiarity of Indian society being at once servile and tyramiical-—those who bowed and scraped before their masters tyrannized their underlings, and thus all the way down the social ladder. The entire Indian socio-political system was iniquitous, and shot through and through with corruption, inefficiency and oppression. There was no sense of justice or fair play. Everything was for sale. In a way, the flaws of Indian society were the flaws of medieval society, which was nearly the same the world over. But the helix of medievalism in India had a few additional twists of its own, such as the ossified Hindu caste system and the fatalistic values underpinning it, the grinding poverty of the people, the debilitating climate of India, and, more than anything else, the near total absence of the spirit of individualism among Indians—and these, combining with the pernicious nature of Mughal rule, disabled India. There were some stirrings of the new during the reign of Akbar, the spirit of open inquiry breaking through the crust of medievalism, but the inertial forces of India, like a viscous, black tide, enveloped and quiesced the new energies. Meanwhile Europe had broken free, to go adventuring across far horizons, to the ends of the earth and the confines of the mind. Columbus had discovered America when Babur was still a lad in what he considered to be “the very farthest limits of the civilized world”, and by the time Babur arrived in Agra, Magellarfs expedition had circumnavigated the world, and the Portuguese had already been in India for over a quarter century. Copernicus, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and Machiavelli were Babur's contemporaries; Shakespeare, Kepler and Galileo were the contemporaries of Akbar and Iahangir; Newton of Aurangzeb. Europe was on the up spiral, India on the down spiral.
This was plain to see. But few could see the obvious, being blinded by the glitter of the Mughal emperor’s mountainous hoard of gold and gems, his marble palaces, the peacock throne, the Taj. But behind the shimmering imperial facade, there was another scene, another life-people in mud hovels, their lives barely distinct from those of animals, wretched, half-naked, half-starved, and from whom every drop of sap had been wrung out by their predatory masters, Muslim as well as Hindu. Only chieftains and amirs fattened, and kings lived like kings. Not surprisingly, at the height of Mughal splendour under Shah Iahan, over a quarter of the gross national product of the empire was appropriated by just 655 individuals, while the bulk of the approximately 120 million people of India lived on a dead level of poverty. No one gave a thought to their plight. Famine swept the land every few years, devouring hundreds of thousands of men, and in its wake came, always and inevitably, pestilence, devouring several hundreds of thousands more. In Mughal India, the contrast between legend and reality was grotesque. "India of the seventeenth century must have been an inferno for the ordinary man,” says Moreland, a fair and perceptive early modern economic analyst of Mughal India. But the common folk were not mere innocent victims either. They were weak, but not innocent. Held in check only by the brute coercive power of the state, they went on a rampage whenever authority slackened, pillaging and killing the unwary and the helpless. The idyllic, peaceable rustic of poetic imagination did not exist. In the towns, too, the common people were unruly, and it took very little to set them rioting. Victims were victimizers awaiting their turn. In the medieval jungle men were beasts.
THE IUNGLE ITSELF of course antedated the Mughals. It in fact antedated even the establishment of the first Muslim empire in India at the end of the twelfth century, for by then the Dark Ages in India, which roughly coincided with a similar epoch in Europe, were already some 500 years old. The culpability of the Mughals was in their failure to lead India out of the medieval morass through the broad path opened up by Akbar. The decline of India's position relative to the rest of the civilized world, especially Europe, is reflected in the contrasting perceptions of travellers in ancient and medieval India. Some 2000 years before Mughal times, Megasthenes, the Greek envoy in the Mauryan court, said of Indian character: “Truth and virtue they hold alike in esteem.” Seven hundred years after Megasthenes, Fa Hsien, a Chinese traveller, had about the same thing to say of Indians, as did Hsuan Tsang in the seventh century, who wrote, “They do not practice deceit, and they keep their sworn obligations . . . They will not take anything wrongfully, and they yield more than fairness requires.” These are no doubt sweeping generalizations, expressions of sentiment rather than statements of fact-— and this is equally true of the blanket condemnations of Mughal India by European travellers. Yet undeniably they contain substantial elements of truth. Besides, the fact that the predominant attitude towards India in ancient times was of goodwill, and that such goodwill was almost totally absent in Mughal times, is in itself significant.
THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY turned out to be, as Manucci had predicted, the age of revolutionary transformation in India-—the first half of the century saw the collapse of the old world, while the second half marked the beginning of the new. The dissolution of Mughal India was largely due to its intemal vicissitudes——the decrepitude of the Mughals and the waywardness of the Marathas—but the pivotal role in building a new India was played by an extemal power, the British. India by itself did not have the vitality either to sustain its old cultures or to transform and renew itself. Under the circumstances, the European domination of India seemed not only inevitable, but desirable——not as the domination of one people over another, but of modernism over medievalism. For the future to be born. If at all.
 
Why don't you just tell us? Why would I want to look at scanned pages in this day and age where everything can be manipulated? I'm sure whatever you profess can be verified by periodical architecture, historical relevance and common sense.

Normally don't agree with BZ, but Sher Shah was by many accounts a good ruler. He set up the zamindari system which was adopted by the Mughals and later by the British. This system lasted into the early 20th century.

He also invested in infrastructure. For example he built the GT road, where as Mughals built palaces and tombs. Which do you think benefited ordinary Indians more?
 
^true that, I was once searching for the scientists during Mughal period, and I came across pretty sharp scientists

Found it !

JAWED ANWAR

First Published: Muslims Weekly, New York June 25, 2004, Issue No.#225

IN GENERAL, people think that English and Western Education started in India after the British occupation and after the educational movement of Muslim scholars (for example, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan) who cooperated the British occupiers. Historically, however, this notion is not accurate. Several British historians have noted that only few nations throughout history can match the educational tradition that Indian Muslims had. The scholars of Muslim India were always trying to learn every knowledge and skill that might be fruitful and beneficial to them. British historians and orientalists, however, distorted history and made accusations that “Muslims were reluctant to learn and were against the English language.” In actuality the opposite was true. Muslims were not against any language or skills, but were wary of Western civilization and its cultural values. British writers used the respectful titles of Muslim Scholars –Ulema, Mullah, and Maulvi– in a humiliating way despite the fact and they knew that Mullah Abdur Rehman Jaami, Mullah Abdul Hakim Sialkoti, and Mullah Jeewan Amethi were highly respected and knowledgeable people of their time.

Professor Muhammad Saleem (d. 2002) researched Western educated Ulemas of India before Sir Syed’s Aligarh and wrote a biography of 150 Ulemas, Mullahs, or Maulvis who studied and traveled to obtain Western education at a time when Arabic and Farsi were the dominating languages and when English was not required in order to get clerical jobs under the British occupation. Based on his research, Professor Saleem wrote a book in Urdu, Maghrabi Zubanon ke Maahir Ulema, Aligarh College ke Qayam se Pahle (The Western Languages Expert Scholars Before the Establishment of Aligarh Collage). He got help from an unpublished dissertation, in Urdu, by Hakim Mahmood Ahmed Barkati of Karachi, Pakistan.

Muslims had a very obvious intellectual superiority over the West. The people of the East viewed Westerners as sea pirates, thugs, looters, and ignorant. They were known as firangi (aliens from the West) several centuries before the occupation. Mujaddid Alif Saani (the great scholar of Islam, 1564-1636) wrote a letter about someone and described him as “ignorant like firangis .”

When Mughal Emperor Akbar received news of the death of his finance minister Mir Fatahullah Shirazi, he promptly responded, “If he had been kidnapped by a ‘firangi” asking ransom for Mir Fatahullah, I would have given the firangi all my wealth and treasure to get Mir Fatahullah back, and I would still have felt that I was the one who profited.” In the eyes of Akbar, firangis were just sea pirates; however, he gave full freedom to firangis to travel, stay, buy lands, and do businesses wherever they want and without any type of restriction.

Scholars before Aligarh College, who learned Western languages, strictly adhered to Islamic ideals; however, after Aligarh College, the values of Western-educated Muslims began to be diluted in the salt sea of Western civilization. Higher educated people of these colleges and universities were now westernized and secularized, and most of them practically left the Islamic values to adopt the new one –the new master’s “code of life.”

Islamic View Point for Learning Foreign Languages:

Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) advised and encouraged his Sahabas (companions) (r.a.w.) to learn foreign languages. He ordered Zaid Bin Saabit Ansari to learn Siriani, Aramaic, Farsi and Habshi and Zaid (r.a.w.) learned these languages (quoted in Mishkaat). Umaru bin Alaass knew Siriani. A famous scholar of Fiqah Hanafi, Mullah Sultan Ali Qari Harwi (1014H/1605AD), in a description of this Hadith (saying of Prophet Muhammad), said, “Islamic Sharia allows us to learn any language, whether it be Hebrew, Suriani, Hindi, Turkish, Farsi, or any other language.”

From the teachings of Islam, Muslims learned every language wherever they went. When Muslims came to India, they even learned Sanskrit, the language of Hindu gods, and Hindi, the language of Hindus. Masood Saad Suleman Lahori (d. 515H/1121AD) and Amir Khusru (d. 725H/1325AD) were famous poets of the Hindi language.

When English was brought to India, Muslims of India immediately began learning English. Shah Abdul Azeez Muhaddis Dehlavi (son of Shah Waliullah, b1702-d1763, a great reformer and scholar of India), the most influential and respected personality of his time, and Maulana Firangi Mahli Lucknavi (1886), the most influential scholar of his time decreed (fatwa) to learn English: “To learn the English language for tashabbah (resemblance) is prohibited; however, to learn English to read letters and books is allowed” (Majmooa Fatawa, Volume 2, Page 80). (Tashabbah means to try to resemble people from another culture and to emulate their values at the cost of your own identity.)

Islamic scholars of India learned Western languages at the level that they have written books in English, delivered speeches, and edited books and transcripts. Here are a few examples from the history (all these examples are mentioned in Professor Syed Muhammad Saleem’s above mentioned book):

1. Mughal Emperor Akbar (1556-1605) invited Father Edward Leiton and Christopher de Vega from Goa (a state/province of India and a colony of Portugal at that time) and told them to establish a school to teach firangi languages. Children of elite and high officials, including his son Murad, were admitted to the school. These students were taught Latin and Portuguese languages. However the Christian religious teachers were not interested in teaching languages; instead, they were only interested in converting Muslims, particularly the King, to Christianity. However, it was the first firangi Madrasah established by order of the king. Abul Fazl, the Prime Minister of King Akbar, translated the Bible into Farsi. Abdur Raheem Khan was appointed by Akbar to learn firangi languages. Farid Bhakri wrote about him, “Abdur Raheem knew all the languages existing in this world.”

2. In the period of Emperor Aurangzeb (1658-1707), Rustam Khan Bin Dianat Khan Badakshani, alias Muatmad Khan, was the first Indian who visited western countries. He visited Lisbon, the capital of Portugal. He translated a book of mathematics from Latin to Arabic. The name of the book was Clavious On Gromonics, first published in 1581 in Rome. The original book and its translation in Arabic are available at the India Office Library, London.

3. Abul Fatah Tipu Sultan (1782-1797), the bravest and most farsighted ruler of India, was well aware of modern education and its development in the West. He invited several scholars from France. He established a huge library with thousands of books. After his martyrdom, most of his books were moved to Fort William College, Calcutta. Charles Stuart prepared a catalogue of the books, “Descriptive Catalogue of the Oriental Library of Tipu Sultan” by Charles Stuart,London, 1809. Tipu Sultan established the first center in India for the translation of books written in Western languages. These books are generally on medicine, pharmacy, and surgery.

4. Nawab Fakhruddin Khan, of Hyderabad Deccan, who was married to the daughter of Asif Jaah Sani, took special interest in Western skills and technology. Perhaps inspired by Tipu Sultan, he formed an institution for translations. This institution has translated various books of geometry, algorithm, astronomy, physics, hydrostats, chemistry, and medicine in the Urdu language.

5. Nawab Ghulam Ghaus Khan Bahadur (1844-1855) established a Madrasah, Madrasah Aazam in Arcot (presently in Tamil Nadu state/province of India). This Madrasah was open for all, and the English language was taught along with Arabic and Farsi. Nawab Salaar Jang, of Hyderabad Deccan, was an expert in Arabic, Farsi, and English. He established a Madrasah, Madrasah Aaliya in 1854, in which English was taught along with Arabic and Farsi.

6. In the beginning of the East India Company, the court law was still Fiqah Hanafi. The famous book of Hanafi, Hidaya was translated into Farsi from Arabic by Qazi Ghulam Yahya Bihari, with the help of Maulvi Tajuddin Bangali and Syed Muhammad Yasin Irani. Captain Hamilton translated this book into English in three volumes, with the help of the Farsi translation. By order of Chief Justice of Calcutta, John Herbert Harrington, Mufti Muhammad Arshad (1221H/1805A) edited all manuscripts for accuracy.

7. Mir Mohammad Hussain Londoni (1777) wrote a travelogue of London and translated a medical book from English to Farsi.

8. Abdul Qader Jaunpuri (d. 1787) wrote several books in Arabic on chemistry, geography, and literature. Two of his most famous books are (1) Alhakma Bainul Uloom al Mashraqiya and Al-Maghrabia (Comparison of Knowledge between East and West) and (2) Kitab fi Taaqub Alial Bacon al Magrabi (The Book on the Criticism of Francis Bacon’s book). The depth of his Western knowledge was apparent.

9. Allama Tafazzul Hussain Khan Kashmiri, a native of Sialkot, Punjab, was a brilliant person of his time. At age thirteen, he moved to Delhi and got various types of education from different teachers. He had almost all the necessary knowledge available in the world. He studied physics, mathematics, optics, and various other subjects in depth. He knew English, Latin, Greek, Farsi, and Arabic languages and translated more than a dozen important books. He translated Sir Isaac Newton’s book Principia Mathmatica (1687) directly from Latin to Arabic.

10. Hakim Athar Ali Dehlavi was a reputed medical doctor of his time. He wrote a dissertation “Cure of Elephantiasis” in English in 1783; in 1792, the paper was published in a historical academic journal of London, Dissertation on Miscellaneous Pieces Relating to the History and Antiquities, Science, and Literature of Asia.

11. Dr. Wazeer Khan, son of Nazeer Khan Pathan of Bihar, completed his modern medical education from Calcutta and went to London for further education. He was disturbed to know that Christian missionaries, after learning Arabic and Farsi, were active in religious debates and fooling Muslims to divert them from their faith. He collected all available editions of the Bible and the Torah and their commentaries and brought them with him to India. He earned expertise in English, Latin, and other languages. He was posted in Agra as a physician. He collected Ulema (Islamic Scholars) in Jama Masjid and started teaching them the Bible and the western languages. After three to four years of teaching, he prepared several Ulema to respond to the Christian missionaries. In 1854, there was a religious debate (Munazra) between a Christian and a Muslim religious scholar in Agra. The debate was won by the Muslim scholars. Dr. Wazeer Khan and Maulvi Rahmatullah Kiranwi, defeated Christian missionaries on every debate and on every occasion.

(This is a series of columns for the understanding of the history of centuries old Madrasah and Islamic Education System in South Asian perspective published in the Muslims Weekly, New York, USA, in series of the weekly column “Personal Notes.”Jawed Anwar can be reached at seerahschool@gmail.com web: www.seerahschool.com ).

^someone here should put a hand on the late Dr Syed Muhammad Saleem's book on the subject!
 
He also invested in infrastructure. For example he built the GT road, where as Mughals built palaces and tombs. Which do you think benefited ordinary Indians more?

my house is at GT road..spend all my childhood commuting through that road.. when I read that it was built by sher shah suri, i went and touched it..thinking i was touching a historical piece..
 
Found it !



^someone here should put a hand on the late Dr Syed Muhammad Saleem's book on the subject!

How many mughals in these total of 11 humans?

Akbar had a genuine interest in meta physics and he had a personal library...but that does not make him a scholar, though he (abu fazl) invented deen-e-ilahi
lolz


Looks like Indian were light years "ahead" from the rest of civilized world...

lolz

Thats the reason, Pakistanis/Muslims must not write about history.

Here are few inventions of Mughal era:

Over the centuries, India has been invaded by the Aryans, Greeks, Persians, Huns, Turks, Arabs, Afghans, the Portuguese, Dutch, French and the English! The Mughals of Turkish-Persian origin, came in the 16th century. Their cuisine which is hugely popular to this day, fuses Indian, Middle Eastern and Persian styles of cooking. Ingredients like aromatic spices, nuts, raisins, cream and milk combine to create rich, regal dishes often garnished with rose petals, silver foil - foods fit for a King!
Mughlai Biryani
Truly regal, Mughlai Biryani is the perfect one-dish meal to serve when you have company. Succulent pieces of meat, cooked in typical Mughlai-style spices, are layered with fragrant, long-grained rice. The cooking pot is then sealed and set to cook on a low heat. The result? Finger-licking goodness!
 
here you go:
(I scanned and then used OCR so their would be few typos)
(I have not underlined/bolded anything and presenting complete chapter to give you an overall picture)

Also can you tell us which book you have referred.

By the way found this on Niccolao Manucci on wikipedia.


Niccolao Manucci


He wrote about his work: "I must add, that I have not relied on the knowledge of others; and I have spoken nothing which I have not seen or undergone..." but there are some very serious issues regarding the veracity of his work as explained in section that follows below.

Controversy

Manucci spent almost his entire life in India. He would then send home the manuscript for "Storia do Mogor" which was lent to the French historian François Catrou in 1707. Catrou wrote another version as Histoire générale de l’empire du Mogul in 1715. The original then emerged in Berlin in 1915 and was written in three different languages. This version was translated and then published. Among those who have doubted Manucci's authenticity are the famous British historian Stanley Lane-Poole and Ali Sadiq.

There are some popular events that are so misinterpreted that it is very hard to believe in the veracity of this authors work especially his work "Storia do Mogor". Some major examples are: 1) On page 120 on this book, Manucci writes that Akbar (3rd mughal ruler) was born in Persia. It is a very well known fact that has been confirmed by many independent authors that Akbar was born in Sindh (in modern day Pakistan) and not Persia.

2) On page 122 Manucci writes about the confrontation between Chand Bibi (regent of Bijapur) and Akbar. It is mentioned by Manucci that Akbar forces defeated Chand Bibi's forces and Akbar fell in love with her and moved her to his own palace. This event is again wrongly portrayed by Manucci, Akbar forces were able to defeat Chand Bibi's forces (they lost once) but Chand Bibi was in fact killed by her own troops and never by Akbar (almost all historians agree on this).

3) Again on page 123 comes a completely flawed story about Akbar. Manucci mentioned that Akbar forces attacked Chittor fort and by deceit Akbar took 'Jaimal' a prisoner and asked his wife 'Rani Padmini' to marry Akbar and join his harem or else he will kill Jaimal. Then Manucci expounds in great detail about how Rani Padmini played a trick on Akbar and assured the release of her husband Jaimal (Jai Mall) from Akbars fort. While this event is true but it completely out of time. This event happened in early 1300 AD, almost 250 years before Akbar was born or 350 years before Manucci was born. It was Alauddin khilji, sultan (king) of Delhi at that time who attacked chittor and not Akbar. Rana Rattan Singh was husband of Padmini while Manucci writes Padmini's husband as Jaimal, Jaimal was commander of Chittor forces in 1567 battle. This incident is widely recorded in Indian history through many paintings and writings and there is not even an iota of doubt that Manucci's work here is not representing history correctly.

There are numerous other incidents in this book which are completely flawed, this raises very big concerns about the veracity of Manucci's work, especially his writings about initial Mughal rulers Humayun, Babar and Akbar.
 
Also can you tell us which book you have referred.

By the way found this on Niccolao Manucci on wikipedia.


Niccolao Manucci


He wrote about his work: "I must add, that I have not relied on the knowledge of others; and I have spoken nothing which I have not seen or undergone..." but there are some very serious issues regarding the veracity of his work as explained in section that follows below.

Controversy

Manucci spent almost his entire life in India. He would then send home the manuscript for "Storia do Mogor" which was lent to the French historian François Catrou in 1707. Catrou wrote another version as Histoire générale de l’empire du Mogul in 1715. The original then emerged in Berlin in 1915 and was written in three different languages. This version was translated and then published. Among those who have doubted Manucci's authenticity are the famous British historian Stanley Lane-Poole and Ali Sadiq.

There are some popular events that are so misinterpreted that it is very hard to believe in the veracity of this authors work especially his work "Storia do Mogor". Some major examples are: 1) On page 120 on this book, Manucci writes that Akbar (3rd mughal ruler) was born in Persia. It is a very well known fact that has been confirmed by many independent authors that Akbar was born in Sindh (in modern day Pakistan) and not Persia.

2) On page 122 Manucci writes about the confrontation between Chand Bibi (regent of Bijapur) and Akbar. It is mentioned by Manucci that Akbar forces defeated Chand Bibi's forces and Akbar fell in love with her and moved her to his own palace. This event is again wrongly portrayed by Manucci, Akbar forces were able to defeat Chand Bibi's forces (they lost once) but Chand Bibi was in fact killed by her own troops and never by Akbar (almost all historians agree on this).

3) Again on page 123 comes a completely flawed story about Akbar. Manucci mentioned that Akbar forces attacked Chittor fort and by deceit Akbar took 'Jaimal' a prisoner and asked his wife 'Rani Padmini' to marry Akbar and join his harem or else he will kill Jaimal. Then Manucci expounds in great detail about how Rani Padmini played a trick on Akbar and assured the release of her husband Jaimal (Jai Mall) from Akbars fort. While this event is true but it completely out of time. This event happened in early 1300 AD, almost 250 years before Akbar was born or 350 years before Manucci was born. It was Alauddin khilji, sultan (king) of Delhi at that time who attacked chittor and not Akbar. Rana Rattan Singh was husband of Padmini while Manucci writes Padmini's husband as Jaimal, Jaimal was commander of Chittor forces in 1567 battle. This incident is widely recorded in Indian history through many paintings and writings and there is not even an iota of doubt that Manucci's work here is not representing history correctly.

There are numerous other incidents in this book which are completely flawed, this raises very big concerns about the veracity of Manucci's work, especially his writings about initial Mughal rulers Humayun, Babar and Akbar.

"this" book, which book? 1707, 1715, 1915 ?


My source was: Abraham Eraly and he got from hundreds of sources...

few of his books: http://www.amazon.com/Abraham-Eraly/e/B001HPRO4M
 
Last edited:
mughlai paratha is also another invention..

PC310194%2Bcopy.jpg


my friends opened a stall with 10k rupees investment during durga puja festival, and made a profit of 50k during the festival time just by seeling mughlai paratha..
 
How many mughals in these total of 11 humans?

Akbar had a genuine interest in meta physics and he had a personal library...but that does not make him a scholar, though he (abu fazl) invented deen-e-ilahi
lolz


Looks like Indian were light years "ahead" from the rest of civilized world...

lolz

Thats the reason, Pakistanis/Muslims must not write about history.

Here are few inventions of Mughal era:

You must also remember that British did the same when they invaded in India what Halaku Khan did when invading Baghdad.
Found interesting bit on history

India before British Invasion – Dharampal’s findings
Posted on September 28, 2007

Its getting more and more clear that the real history of india is not what we study. Particularly the works of dharamapal, had enlightened many of the young indians of our real history. Atleast, it has proved that what we learn about our history is not true.

Just presenting the works of dharampal in bullet points. (More about dharampal in www.dharampal.net)

To the British darkness and ignorance had wholly different meanings and to the majority of them, these terms conveyed not any ignorance of arts and crafts or technology, or aesthetics but rather the absence of the knowledge of Christianity and its scriptural heritage.

Peasants, artisans, those engaged in the manufacture of iron and steel, or in the various processes of its flourishing indigenous textile industry, or its surgeons and medical men, even many of its astronomers and astrologers belonged to this predominant section i.e. Sudras is unquestionable.

Some of the important changes brought about the British were (i) revenue enhancement and centralization, (ii) attempts at breaking the sense of community (geographical, or based on occupation or kinship) amongst the people of India, (iii) reducing their consumption to the minimum through higher taxation and lowering of wage rates, and (iv) an imposition of newer concepts of property rights and laws.

They created a system of landlordism, ryotwari and peasant indebtedness.

Deliberate & planned lowering of the wages of Indians.

Caste

When the British began to conquer India, the majority of the rajas in different parts of India had also been from amongst such castes which have been placed in the sudra varna.

Yet it can, perhaps also be argued that the existence of caste has added to the tenacity of Indian society, to its capacity to survive and after lying low to be able to stand up again.
The British demonized caste because it stood in the way of their breaking Indian society, hindered the process of atomization, and made the task of conquest and governance more difficult.
Today’s backward classes or Sudras cultural and economic backwardness is post 1800 due to impact of British economic policies.
Madras Presidency 1822 survey showed sudras and castes below formed 70 per cent to 80 per cent of the total students in the Tamil speaking areas.
Some of today’s Bihar’s notified tribes were whose ancestors were warriors and gave unceasing battle to the British till they got exhausted and succumbed to the overwhelming British power. Besides being warriors, their main occupations are said to have been of ironsmith (Iuhar) etc.

Agriculture

In 1804 according to The Edinburgh Review wages of the Indian agricultural laborer were also much more than British counter part.

There is a paper by Capt. Halcott on the drill plough employed in south India. He has said that he never imagined a drill plough considered as a modern European invention, at work in remote village in India

High Yields were on account of the variety of seeds available to the Indian peasant, the sophistication and simplicity of his tools, and the extreme care and labor he expended in tending to his fields and crops.

Industry

Around 1800 India had 15-20 lakh weavers with mining being major industrial activity. Due to British policies by 1820 Indian industry was on its knees.
There are accounts of the Indian process of making steel which was called ‘wootz’. The British experts who examined samples of ‘wootz’ sent to them by one Dr. Helenus Scott have commented that it is decidedly superior compared in any other steel they have seen.

Incidentally, modern plastic surgery in Britain is stated by its inventor to have been derived from and developed after the observation and study of the Indian practice from 1790 onwards.

Because of the British desire to invest newly acquired British capital, a new structure of industrialization began to be established in various parts of India, especially round Calcutta and Bombay, by about 1880.
The larger proportion of the historical and traditional professionals of Indian Industry however, even today, work outside the modern industrial complex, and mostly work individually and on their own. In the idiom of today they would form a fairly large proportion of the ‘Backward’ and ‘Other Backward’ castes.
According to current findings the India-China region produced around 73 per cent of the industrial manufactures of the world around 1750.

Cloth was manufactured in practically all the 400 districts. Many districts of south India had 10,000 to 20,000 looms in each district even around 1810. Also India had some 10,000 furnaces for the manufacture of iron and steel. Indian steel was considered of very high quality and in the early decades of the nineteenth century, it was being used by the British for the making of surgical instruments.

In 1763 smallpox was consciously and deliberately introduced in North America by the British military commander to kill local population.

One of the major characteristics of India has been its emphasis on communities based on shared localities as well as relations of kinship termed as jatis, in contrast to the preference for individuation in non-Slav Europe. It was complementarities and relatedness amongst groups within localities, and more so within regions, which has shaped India’s polity for the past two thousand years and more. This interrelatedness and the consensus, which grew out of it, seem to be the major elements that define the Indian concept of dharma.

India needs to focus on agriculture, education, forging close relations with the Buddhist countries of South East Asia & Far East but an important priority should be to re-establish self esteem, courage, community feeling, and collective freedom

http://psenthilraja.wordpress.com/2007/09/28/india-before-british-invasion-dharampals-findings/
 
There are numerous other incidents in this book which are completely flawed, this raises very big concerns about the veracity of Manucci's work, especially his writings about initial Mughal rulers Humayun, Babar and Akbar.

That is easily explained. Manucci arrived in India as a young boy during the closing years of Shahjehan's reign. What ever he writes about the Mughal period before Shahjehan is based on hearsay, what ever he heard, and is certainly not authentic.
 
Last edited:
You must also remember that British did the same when they invaded in India what Halaku Khan did when invading Baghdad.
Found interesting bit on history

India before British Invasion – Dharampal’s findings
Posted on September 28, 2007

Its getting more and more clear that the real history of india is not what we study. Particularly the works of dharamapal, had enlightened many of the young indians of our real history. Atleast, it has proved that what we learn about our history is not true.

Just presenting the works of dharampal in bullet points. (More about dharampal in www.dharampal.net)

To the British darkness and ignorance had wholly different meanings and to the majority of them, these terms conveyed not any ignorance of arts and crafts or technology, or aesthetics but rather the absence of the knowledge of Christianity and its scriptural heritage.

Peasants, artisans, those engaged in the manufacture of iron and steel, or in the various processes of its flourishing indigenous textile industry, or its surgeons and medical men, even many of its astronomers and astrologers belonged to this predominant section i.e. Sudras is unquestionable.

Some of the important changes brought about the British were (i) revenue enhancement and centralization, (ii) attempts at breaking the sense of community (geographical, or based on occupation or kinship) amongst the people of India, (iii) reducing their consumption to the minimum through higher taxation and lowering of wage rates, and (iv) an imposition of newer concepts of property rights and laws.

They created a system of landlordism, ryotwari and peasant indebtedness.

Deliberate & planned lowering of the wages of Indians.

Caste

When the British began to conquer India, the majority of the rajas in different parts of India had also been from amongst such castes which have been placed in the sudra varna.

Yet it can, perhaps also be argued that the existence of caste has added to the tenacity of Indian society, to its capacity to survive and after lying low to be able to stand up again.
The British demonized caste because it stood in the way of their breaking Indian society, hindered the process of atomization, and made the task of conquest and governance more difficult.
Today’s backward classes or Sudras cultural and economic backwardness is post 1800 due to impact of British economic policies.
Madras Presidency 1822 survey showed sudras and castes below formed 70 per cent to 80 per cent of the total students in the Tamil speaking areas.
Some of today’s Bihar’s notified tribes were whose ancestors were warriors and gave unceasing battle to the British till they got exhausted and succumbed to the overwhelming British power. Besides being warriors, their main occupations are said to have been of ironsmith (Iuhar) etc.

Agriculture

In 1804 according to The Edinburgh Review wages of the Indian agricultural laborer were also much more than British counter part.

There is a paper by Capt. Halcott on the drill plough employed in south India. He has said that he never imagined a drill plough considered as a modern European invention, at work in remote village in India

High Yields were on account of the variety of seeds available to the Indian peasant, the sophistication and simplicity of his tools, and the extreme care and labor he expended in tending to his fields and crops.

Industry

Around 1800 India had 15-20 lakh weavers with mining being major industrial activity. Due to British policies by 1820 Indian industry was on its knees.
There are accounts of the Indian process of making steel which was called ‘wootz’. The British experts who examined samples of ‘wootz’ sent to them by one Dr. Helenus Scott have commented that it is decidedly superior compared in any other steel they have seen.

Incidentally, modern plastic surgery in Britain is stated by its inventor to have been derived from and developed after the observation and study of the Indian practice from 1790 onwards.

Because of the British desire to invest newly acquired British capital, a new structure of industrialization began to be established in various parts of India, especially round Calcutta and Bombay, by about 1880.
The larger proportion of the historical and traditional professionals of Indian Industry however, even today, work outside the modern industrial complex, and mostly work individually and on their own. In the idiom of today they would form a fairly large proportion of the ‘Backward’ and ‘Other Backward’ castes.
According to current findings the India-China region produced around 73 per cent of the industrial manufactures of the world around 1750.

Cloth was manufactured in practically all the 400 districts. Many districts of south India had 10,000 to 20,000 looms in each district even around 1810. Also India had some 10,000 furnaces for the manufacture of iron and steel. Indian steel was considered of very high quality and in the early decades of the nineteenth century, it was being used by the British for the making of surgical instruments.

In 1763 smallpox was consciously and deliberately introduced in North America by the British military commander to kill local population.

One of the major characteristics of India has been its emphasis on communities based on shared localities as well as relations of kinship termed as jatis, in contrast to the preference for individuation in non-Slav Europe. It was complementarities and relatedness amongst groups within localities, and more so within regions, which has shaped India’s polity for the past two thousand years and more. This interrelatedness and the consensus, which grew out of it, seem to be the major elements that define the Indian concept of dharma.

India needs to focus on agriculture, education, forging close relations with the Buddhist countries of South East Asia & Far East but an important priority should be to re-establish self esteem, courage, community feeling, and collective freedom

http://psenthilraja.wordpress.com/2007/09/28/india-before-british-invasion-dharampals-findings/

I will check this out (as this is exactly my class mate told me in university time "Sonay ka anda dainay walli murghi" ) and will respond.
 
That is easily explained. Manucci arrived in India as a young boy during the closing years of Shahjehan's reign. What ever he writes about the Mughal period before Shahjehan is based on hearsay, what ever he heard, and is certainly not authentic.

yes, but this got nothing to do with his reporting about the general state of India during his time in India.
 
"this" book, which book? 1707, 1715, 1915 ?


My source was: Abraham Eraly and he got from hundreds of sources...

few of his books: http://www.amazon.com/Abraham-Eraly/e/B001HPRO4M

You should not rely on one source especially when the other source is completely opposite.:)

So you are accepting what Abraham Eraly wrote but disregarding any one else. Did Mr. Eraly quoted Will Durrant's claim of education in India at the time of Muslim rule, Did he quoted Alexander Hamilton, If not why?

Can you tell background of Abraham Eraly

This is what I got

Abraham Eraly

Abraham Eraly was born in Kerala and was educated there and in Chennai. He has taught Indian history in colleges in India and the United States, and was the editor of a current affairs magazine for several years. His works include two critically acclaimed and bestselling books on India: The Last Spring: The Lives and Times of the Great Mughals (later published in two volumes as Emperors Of The Peacock Throne, and The Mughal World) and Gem In The Lotus: The Seeding of Indian Civilization.
 
Last edited:
yes, but this got nothing to do with his reporting about the general state of India during his time in India.

True. Historian's mainly rely on his description of events during his time in India. No body bothers about what he said about Akbar or Chand bibi.
 
That is easily explained. Manucci arrived in India as a young boy during the closing years of Shahjehan's reign. What ever he writes about the Mughal period before Shahjehan is based on hearsay, what ever he heard, and is certainly not authentic.

So here you are saying that he wrote what he heard from people. The people must be having few versions. He was there his whole life and he was not able to confirm what is correct and what is not?
It will be hard for me to rely on such sources. There is a chance his works were manipulated by someone.
 
Last edited:
So here you are saying that he wrote what he heard from people. The people must be having few versions. He was there his whole life and he was not able to confirm what is correct and what is not?
It will be hard for me to rely on such sources. There is a chance his works were manipulated by someone.

That is up to you but most travel writing is like that. There are accounts that can be verified against other accounts for consistency and there are accounts which are best ignored. Trained historians make such judgments all the time.
 
You must also remember that British did the same when they invaded in India what Halaku Khan did when invading Baghdad.
Found interesting bit on history

India before British Invasion – Dharampal’s findings
Posted on September 28, 2007

Its getting more and more clear that the real history of india is not what we study. Particularly the works of dharamapal, had enlightened many of the young indians of our real history. Atleast, it has proved that what we learn about our history is not true.

Just presenting the works of dharampal in bullet points. (More about dharampal in www.dharampal.net)

To the British darkness and ignorance had wholly different meanings and to the majority of them, these terms conveyed not any ignorance of arts and crafts or technology, or aesthetics but rather the absence of the knowledge of Christianity and its scriptural heritage.

Peasants, artisans, those engaged in the manufacture of iron and steel, or in the various processes of its flourishing indigenous textile industry, or its surgeons and medical men, even many of its astronomers and astrologers belonged to this predominant section i.e. Sudras is unquestionable.

Some of the important changes brought about the British were (i) revenue enhancement and centralization, (ii) attempts at breaking the sense of community (geographical, or based on occupation or kinship) amongst the people of India, (iii) reducing their consumption to the minimum through higher taxation and lowering of wage rates, and (iv) an imposition of newer concepts of property rights and laws.

They created a system of landlordism, ryotwari and peasant indebtedness.

Deliberate & planned lowering of the wages of Indians.

Caste

When the British began to conquer India, the majority of the rajas in different parts of India had also been from amongst such castes which have been placed in the sudra varna.

Yet it can, perhaps also be argued that the existence of caste has added to the tenacity of Indian society, to its capacity to survive and after lying low to be able to stand up again.
The British demonized caste because it stood in the way of their breaking Indian society, hindered the process of atomization, and made the task of conquest and governance more difficult.
Today’s backward classes or Sudras cultural and economic backwardness is post 1800 due to impact of British economic policies.
Madras Presidency 1822 survey showed sudras and castes below formed 70 per cent to 80 per cent of the total students in the Tamil speaking areas.
Some of today’s Bihar’s notified tribes were whose ancestors were warriors and gave unceasing battle to the British till they got exhausted and succumbed to the overwhelming British power. Besides being warriors, their main occupations are said to have been of ironsmith (Iuhar) etc.

Agriculture

In 1804 according to The Edinburgh Review wages of the Indian agricultural laborer were also much more than British counter part.

There is a paper by Capt. Halcott on the drill plough employed in south India. He has said that he never imagined a drill plough considered as a modern European invention, at work in remote village in India

High Yields were on account of the variety of seeds available to the Indian peasant, the sophistication and simplicity of his tools, and the extreme care and labor he expended in tending to his fields and crops.

Industry

Around 1800 India had 15-20 lakh weavers with mining being major industrial activity. Due to British policies by 1820 Indian industry was on its knees.
There are accounts of the Indian process of making steel which was called ‘wootz’. The British experts who examined samples of ‘wootz’ sent to them by one Dr. Helenus Scott have commented that it is decidedly superior compared in any other steel they have seen.

Incidentally, modern plastic surgery in Britain is stated by its inventor to have been derived from and developed after the observation and study of the Indian practice from 1790 onwards.

Because of the British desire to invest newly acquired British capital, a new structure of industrialization began to be established in various parts of India, especially round Calcutta and Bombay, by about 1880.
The larger proportion of the historical and traditional professionals of Indian Industry however, even today, work outside the modern industrial complex, and mostly work individually and on their own. In the idiom of today they would form a fairly large proportion of the ‘Backward’ and ‘Other Backward’ castes.
According to current findings the India-China region produced around 73 per cent of the industrial manufactures of the world around 1750.

Cloth was manufactured in practically all the 400 districts. Many districts of south India had 10,000 to 20,000 looms in each district even around 1810. Also India had some 10,000 furnaces for the manufacture of iron and steel. Indian steel was considered of very high quality and in the early decades of the nineteenth century, it was being used by the British for the making of surgical instruments.

In 1763 smallpox was consciously and deliberately introduced in North America by the British military commander to kill local population.

One of the major characteristics of India has been its emphasis on communities based on shared localities as well as relations of kinship termed as jatis, in contrast to the preference for individuation in non-Slav Europe. It was complementarities and relatedness amongst groups within localities, and more so within regions, which has shaped India’s polity for the past two thousand years and more. This interrelatedness and the consensus, which grew out of it, seem to be the major elements that define the Indian concept of dharma.

India needs to focus on agriculture, education, forging close relations with the Buddhist countries of South East Asia & Far East but an important priority should be to re-establish self esteem, courage, community feeling, and collective freedom

http://psenthilraja.wordpress.com/2007/09/28/india-before-british-invasion-dharampals-findings/


Okay, I read and following are the salient points:

1) Weavers
2) Mining
3) Plastic Surgery
4) Drill plough

1) Weavers 2) Mining

Around 1800 India had 15-20 lakh weavers with mining being major industrial activity.

question: what kind of technology was in use by this "industry"

well article provides the answer as below:

The larger proportion of the historical and traditional professionals of Indian Industry however, even today, work outside the modern industrial complex, and mostly work individually and on their own.

3) Plastic Surgery
Nothing to do with Mughals (1526AD)

Dr. S. C. Almast personally met the last Hakim of Kangra, Mr. Dinanath Kanghaira whose family was practicing the art of rhinoplasty since the war of Kurukshetra and at Kangra since 1440 AD. Those with cut noses and deformed noses due to leprosy and syphilis were operated by them. The patient was given wine to drink to put him to sleep (since anesthesia did not exist in those days). A pattern of the defect was made on a paper. A handkerchief was tied around the neck to make the veins of the forehead prominent, and the flap was marked including the vein on the forehead (in the pedicle between the eyebrows). The forehead flap was folded in itself to form the inner lining.

The knowledge of rhinoplasty spread from India to Arabia and Persia and from there to Egypt and Italy in the 15th century. The first translation of Sushruta Samhita was in Latin by Hessler in 1844 and in Arabic by Ibn Abi Usaybia (1203-1269 AD) and later into German by Vellurs. Bhishagratna translated it in English in 1907.[2]

Although Britishers lived in India for a long time, they were not aware of Indian Rhinoplasty till 1793. Mr. James Findlay and Mr. Thomas Crusoe who were surgeons at the British Residency in Poona in 1793 witnessed the operation on “Cowasjee” and reported the details of the operation in the Madras Gazette. The same operation on Cowasjee was later published in Gentleman’s magazine, London, Oct. 1794 by a letter from Mr. Lucas[2] as follows: “Cowasjee, a Mahratta of the caste of the husbandmen, he was a bullock driver with the English Army in the war of 1792, and was made prisoner by Tipu Sultan, who cut off his nose and one of his hands. He joined the Bombay Army near Seringapatam. For about 1 year he remained without a nose, when he had a new one put on by a man of the Brickmaker (potter’s) caste near Poona”.


4) Drill Plough

There is a paper by Capt. Halcott on the drill plough employed in south India. He has said that he never imagined a drill plough considered as a modern European invention, at work in remote village in India

As far as I know, Mughal never ruled the South India
Capt. Halcott saw drill plough in Tamil Nadu and Portuguese ruled that area, so most likely it's a Portuguese gift.
 
^which type of drill plough,people were using animal driven drill plough before the arrival of portuguese
 
^in south india most of the farmers used single blade drill ploughs with steel edges
 
Last edited:
^in south india most of the farmers used single blade drill ploughs with steel edges

corr*

Capt. Halcott saw someone using drill plough at around 1800...

Portuguese came to india b4 mughals (around 1500)

so I would imagine b4 Portuguese, farmers would be using age old single blade ploughs..
 
How many mughals in these total of 11 humans?

Yes, the only significant contribution the Mughals did to world civilization was paratha... *sigh*

All these eleven chaps bloomed during the Mughal period, and yes they're only eleven (few chosen by the author), but had you read the article you'd know that book quoted is only about the "mullahs" who made themselves familial with Western science, and they numbered 150 in total, not 11 ; if the author wanted to do a research about the "mullahs" who learned sciences there would be obviously WAY MORE numbers, and if the author wanted to do a research about the "average Muslims" (so not only religious clerics) there would have been WAY WAY WAY MORE than 150 names.
 
You have to hand it to BZ, even the most staunch Hindutva wouldn't keep such an impressive library of material to discredit the Muslim rule in India.
 
Saw a programme by Andrew Marr who said that the last Mughal Emperor murdered his brother and nephew, adopted a fundamentalist style religion, banned music and learning, throttled trade, and exhausted the Empire so that the British were able to conquer India with ease.

sounds like opportunistic pathogens
 
You have to hand it to BZ, even the most staunch Hindutva wouldn't keep such an impressive library of material to discredit the Muslim rule in India.

I am chugtai and very proud that Mughal ruled the India... (and also china, Iran, iraq, turkey russia etc etc.) (and also majority of muslims in Indian sub-continent are sunnis and majority of muslims in iran are shias thanks to Mughal and there are several other "good" things)

That's why when someone accused Mughal that they wasted energy(resources) in modernizing India then I had to defend Mughals...
 
As far as I know, Mughal never ruled the South India
Capt. Halcott saw drill plough in Tamil Nadu and Portuguese ruled that area, so most likely it's a Portuguese gift.

The Portuguese did NOT rule South India, Britain and to a lesser extent, France and Denmark controlled the area.
 
The Portuguese did NOT rule South India, Britain and to a lesser extent, France and Denmark controlled the area.

I do not know much about the history of south india and we can disagree about "rule" but Portuguese were definitely in south-india.

250px-Portuguese_India.PNG


in any case, its irrelevant to my point if we agree that Mughals didn't rule south india during babur,hamyoon, akbar, jhangir and shahjehan.
and more importantly, that Mughals didn't introduce drill plough...otherwise we would see them in north india...
 
Last edited:
Does this home's architecture resembles Mughal one

I am in my home town Hoshiarpur these days. Was wandering through the town center and I observed this home. I never paid much attention to it before but today had a deeper look in the Architecture from outside.

Does the Architecture of this homes resembles Mughal Architecture ?
Was wondering what the connection could be to the pre-partition times.

The current owners, from what I found out have always been a Sikh Family and currently they are settled abroad. This house is 150 years old from what information I have gathered.

IMG_1535.JPG

IMG_1536.JPG

IMG_1537.JPG
 
I am in my home town Hoshiarpur these days. Was wandering through the town center and I observed this home. I never paid much attention to it before but today had a deeper look in the Architecture from outside.

Does the Architecture of this homes resembles Mughal Architecture ?
Was wondering what the connection could be to the pre-partition times.

The current owners, from what I found out have always been a Sikh Family and currently they are settled abroad. This house is 150 years old from what information I have gathered.

View attachment 113788

View attachment 113789

View attachment 113790

Well there is a Mughul connection with the city so guess stands to reason that there is some influence on architecture?
 
Back
Top